Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
1
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ........................................................................... 1
1.MAIN FINDINGS .................................................................................... 3
2. CONTEXT AND PURPOSES OF THE STUDY .................................. 6
3. THE RESEARCH APPROACH ............................................................. 8
4. THE PROJECT SCHOOLS AND STUDENTS .................................. 13
5.THE LITERACY PROGRAMS.............................................................. 19
6.SCHOOL SITE VISITS AND OBSERVATIONS ................................ 27
7.THE DART ASSESSMENTS ................................................................. 35
8. TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES: THE LOGBOOKS ............................ 54
9.THE STUDENT CASE STUDIES ......................................................... 58
10. SUMMER SCHOOLS .......................................................................... 65
11.
SUCCESSFUL
INTERVENTIONS:
MAIN
FINDINGS,
RECOMMENDATIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER
RESEARCH ................................................................................................ 68
REFERENCES ............................................................................................ 77
2
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
3
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Many people contributed to the work of the Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project.
Most importantly, special thanks is due to the students, teachers and principals in the 44
project schools listed below. Throughout 1999 they willingly provided a wide range of data
on the literacy programs and strategies in their schools. The teachers, in many cases the
literacy coordinator, who took on the role of school coordinator for the project, and facilitated
the data collection and all liaison with ACER, played a key role in the project, and their work
is acknowledge with many thanks.
The research team visited 20 of the schools on at least two occasions; we particularly wish to
thank these schools for their welcome, and the opportunity to spend time observing in
classrooms.
Bairnsdale Secondary College, Bayview College Portland, Beechworth Secondary College,
Broadmeadows Secondary College, Brunswick Secondary College, Catholic Ladies College
Eltham, Catholic Regional College Melton, Collingwood College, Covenant College, Deer
Park Secondary College, Dromana Secondary College, Eaglehawk Secondary College,
Epping Secondary College, Essendon Keilor District Secondary College, Eumemmerring
Secondary College (Fountain Gate Campus), FJC College Benalla, Frankston High School,
Heatherhill Secondary College, Highview College Maryborough, Kurnai College (Morwell
Campus), Lyndale Secondary College, MacKillop College, Marian College Sunshine,
McGuire College, Monbulk College, Murtoa Secondary College, Newcomb Secondary
College, Oakleigh Greek Orthodox College, Orbost Secondary College, Ovens Secondary
College, Padua College Mornington, Presentation College Moe, Princes Hill Secondary
College, Robinvale Secondary College, Simonds College West Melbourne, St John's Regional
College Dandenong, St Paul's College Altona, Tallangatta Secondary College, Tyrrell College,
Upper Yarra Secondary College, Werribee Secondary College, Wheelers Hill Secondary
College , Wodonga West Secondary College.
Other people who contributed a great deal to this project, and whose work is acknowledged
with appreciation include:

Sally Milburn, who in 1998-9 was Literacy Officer, Years 5 – 10, Department of
Education, managed the project and worked closely with the ACER research team. She
organised the opening and closing conferences for the project, and contributed
extensively to the whole project.

Susan Dennett, Manager, Curriculum Development, Curriculum Development and
Learning Technologies Branch, Department of Education, provided support and advice
to the project.

Members of the Successful Interventions Secondary Literacy and Numeracy Initiative
Steering Committee, which included all partners in the project: Department of Education,
Victoria; the Catholic Education Commission of Victoria, and the Association of
Independent Schools of Victoria. The Steering Committee met regularly throughout the
project, and provided practical advice and encouragement.
1
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project

Caroline Stanistreet and Nina Bromberg, Literacy Section, Department of Education,
Training and Youth Affairs, Canberra.

At ACER, Andrew Stephanou, Margaret Forster, John Ainley, Ken Rowe, Prue
Anderson, Lynne Darkin, Wendy Bodey, Colin Crawford, and staff in Project Services
made significant contributions during the course of the project.
Finally, acknowledgment is made of the funding provided by the Department of Education,
Training and Youth Affairs, Canberra, through the Commonwealth’s Secondary School
Literacy and Numeracy Initiative. This initiative established cross-sectoral projects focused
on improving the development of literacy and numeracy for low-achieving secondary school
students, and enabled this important study to be undertaken.
Note: The quotations at the beginning of each chapter have been drawn from the teachers’
logbooks.
2
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
1. MAIN FINDINGS
…. it must be more beneficial to have students taught, and to be developing reading and
comprehension skills within the curriculum context. It must make it easier for students to
apply and develop skills if they are constantly focussed upon in a consistent manner across
the curriculum.
Current practices directed to the improvement of literacy learning in Victorian
secondary schools include a wide variety of literacy intervention programs and
strategies implemented at Year 7. These programs vary according to the school
context, but a number of key principles underpin those strategies and programs
which appear to achieve successful outcomes for students.
Analysis of the quantitative and qualitative data collected in the Successful
Interventions Literacy Research Project indicates that some intervention programs and
targeted literacy teaching strategies do make a difference to literacy achievement.
The overall context for teaching and learning is a decisive factor in the effectiveness
of particular programs or strategies. Careful targeting of the intervention program
and strategies to address individual students’ literacy learning needs is of major
importance. Other critical factors include teachers’ professional knowledge, and
school leadership in all aspects of literacy education.
The multilevel analysis of the data in this project indicated that schools achieved
better than expected student performance when school policies and teaching
practices operated within the following framework.
1.1 A framework for improving literacy learning
The following elements constitute a framework for improvement of literacy learning
outcomes for students in Year 7:







3
Professional leadership;
Strong professional knowledge and understanding of literacy learning and
effective teaching and learning strategies;
Monitoring and assessment to identify students who need additional support;
Targeted support for the individual students requiring additional assistance,
drawing from a wide repertoire of strategies;
Communication between teachers across all Key Learning Areas, and recognition
of the role of literacy learning in all Key Learning Areas.
Close connections between the additional support and the mainstream
curriculum.
Clear communication between home and school.
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
This framework spans three zones of school practice relating to improving literacy
learning: whole school policies and practices; classroom practices and strategies in
all key learning areas; and policies and practices for specific interventions. Within
each of these zones, the evidence from the Successful Interventions Literacy Research
project indicates the importance of a number of features of effective policies and
practices.
1.2 Whole school policies and practices
The whole school policies and practices that supported successful literacy
interventions included:








the identification, early in Year 7, of students with low levels of literacy
achievement, using transition information from primary schools, formal testing
and teacher observation and judgement;
targeting and monitoring individual students identified as requiring literacy
support;
for individual students, providing, in appropriate contexts, support which
explicitly addresses their particular literacy learning needs;
explicit and on-going professional development providing knowledge of literacy
and language development and a broad repertoire of literacy teaching strategies
for teachers in all key learning areas;
leadership, professional support and coordination provided by a school literacy
coordinator with significant experience and knowledge of literacy education;
strong support for the literacy program from the school leadership team;
staffing, organisational structures and timetabling which allow for flexible and
varied groupings of students;
effective use of human resources, budget allocations, and teaching spaces.
1.2 Classroom practices and strategies in all key learning areas
Classroom practices and policies which effectively supported students’ literacy
learning included:






sustained teaching of the full range of reading and writing skills specified in the
English Curriculum and Standards Framework;
explicit teaching of the curriculum literacies of each key learning area;
support, in appropriate contexts, provided to individual students through
programs and strategies which address their particular literacy learning needs;
classroom practices inclusive of all students;
opportunities for students to receive one-to-one support from teachers and
teaching aides in the classroom context;
selection of reading materials and purposeful writing activities which engage
students’ interests;
4
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project






regular, planned opportunities for students to engage in sustained reading and
writing activities, in a variety of contexts;
consistent and detailed monitoring of students’ progress in literacy, using a
variety of observation and assessment strategies, and the provision of regular
and frequent feedback to students;
establishing and maintaining clear lines of communication between all key
learning area teachers of each class at the year level;
using information communication technologies to provide students with fresh
opportunities to develop and demonstrate literacy skills;
acknowledging and responding to the diversity of interests and literacy practices
which engage students at home and in other settings beyond the school;
giving students opportunities to work in a variety of whole class and small
group settings, in teaching spaces appropriate to the activities.
1.3 Policies and practices for specific interventions
Students with particular literacy learning difficulties benefitted from intensive and
focused teaching and support provided through specific interventions on a short or
longer term basis. Key features of those interventions which enabled students to
improve their achievement levels in literacy included:











5
identifying the specific literacy learning needs of students with low levels of
literacy achievement, and drawing on a wide repertoire of teaching strategies to
provide support matched specifically to those needs;
providing structured, sequenced sessions in one to one or small group settings
which give students regular opportunities over time to work on specific literacy
needs;
maximising opportunities, in individual or small group contexts, for students to
practice reading a range of texts silently and aloud, and to write both short and
sustained texts;
creating opportunities for students to work regularly and over time with a
teacher or tutor with whom they can establish an effective working relationship;
recognising the importance of fostering confidence and self-esteem for students
with previous experience of low literacy achievement;
assisting students to develop more effective organisational skills;
linking the support provided in out-of-class settings with the work of the regular
classroom;
acknowledging and celebrating students’ progress in literacy;
constant monitoring of students in intervention programs and in regular classes,
adjusting the intervention program and strategies to target identified needs;
providing intensive support for a short period, or sustained support over a
longer period as required;
where intervention programs involve withdrawal from regular classes, ensuring
that all the teachers of a particular student are aware of the purpose and nature
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project

of the intervention program, and that they are frequently consulted regarding
observed improvements or changes in the quality of the student’s work;
establishing effective links between home and school, and maintaining regular
communication with parents of low achieving students.
2. CONTEXT AND PURPOSES OF THE STUDY
Having been involved in this research project has been very useful. It has given me a chance
to reflect and consider more systematically the progress of our program. Writing in the
journals has been beneficial too. I have taken photocopies and will use my notes to help with
planning for 2000 and beyond.
This report describes the conduct and outcomes of an observational, analytical study
of literacy intervention strategies and programs currently used in Victorian
secondary schools in Year 7. The investigation was undertaken within the three
phase major project, Successful Interventions: A Secondary Literacy and Numeracy
Initiative, conducted by the Victorian Department of Education Employment and
Training (formerly the Department of Education) and its partners, the Catholic
Education Commission of Victoria and the Association of Independent Schools of
Victoria. Funding was provided by the Commonwealth Department of Education,
Training and Youth Affairs.
The overall aim of the project was to make comparative observations of a range of
literacy intervention programs and strategies in order to provide a research basis for
providing advice on existing literacy intervention programs and making
recommendations for the further development of literacy intervention strategies at
the secondary school level. This is consistent with the national commitment to
improved literacy and numeracy learning in the National Literacy and Numeracy
Plan, as detailed in Literacy for All, (DEETYA, 1998)
Specific aims of the project identified in the project brief were to:
1. investigate a range of literacy intervention programs and strategies with students
in Year 7 in 1999;
2. monitor the progress of individuals and groups identified at Year 7 as being at
educational risk because of low literacy achievement;
3. analyse the performance of all participating students on a common assessment
instrument in the early and concluding phases of the study;
4. analyse both quantitative and qualitative data relating to literacy intervention
programs and strategies;
5. evaluate the effectiveness of the literacy intervention programs;
6. make appropriate recommendations about a number of intervention approaches
against a set of agreed criteria.
A broad view of what constitutes "literacy interventions" was deliberately used
within the project, which focused on programs and strategies based on the
6
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
expectation that all students can be successful, given appropriate teaching and
opportunities to learn. The programs and strategies investigated included those
designed to provide specific support to students to help overcome literacy
difficulties, as well as those strategies, policies and programs intended to improve
literacy learning for all students.
The outcomes of this research continue the work commenced in Phase 1 of Successful
Interventions, an environmental scan of literacy programs and strategies conducted
in 1998 by the Victorian Association for the Teaching of English.
The research in Phase 2, the Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project, was
conducted in 44 Victorian schools, including government, Catholic and independent
schools in rural and urban locations, and including both large and small schools. The
selection was made on the basis of information derived from the VATE
environmental scan, and from additional information provided by education
systems. All programs and strategies were already planned or in place in the schools
selected, and schools were provided with small research grants to enable them to
implement the programs and strategies as planned. The allocation of these grants
was managed by the Department of Education. The selection of schools was such
that a wide range of programs and strategies was included in the project. The
selection of schools also made it possible to investigate the operation of some of the
same programs in different contexts.
Specific selection criteria for participating schools included:
 the current use of an intervention program or programs in the school;
 the currency of a literacy policy and the position of a literacy coordinator in a
school; and
 a school population including one or more of the groups identified in the 1996
National School English Literacy Survey (Masters and Forster, 1997) based on socioeconomic background, gender, Indigenous students, and students from nonEnglish speaking backgrounds.
7
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
3. THE RESEARCH APPROACH
The fact that we are a part of this project has certainly raised the profile of literacy in our
school. Teachers have asked questions about the project.
In order to obtain the richest possible information on the programs and their
educational impact, the research methodology was designed to collect a range of
qualitative and quantitative data on the literacy intervention strategies and
programs implemented at Year 7 in the 44 government, Catholic and independent
schools selected for the study.
The research practice underpinning this design combined quantitative and
qualitative data, thus providing a broad base for evaluating the effectiveness of the
range of literacy intervention programs and strategies. The project brief drew
attention to the observation of Year 7 students in diverse literacy teaching contexts.
The qualitative data was derived from a number of perspectives, including teachers’
reports and reflections, site visits and observations of the enacted curriculum of the
literacy programs and strategies, and individual student case studies. Additional
observations were made of two professional development summer schools.
A rigorous literacy assessment process using the ACER Developmental Assessment
Resource for Teachers (DART) (Forster et al, 1994) materials provided quantitative
data on background variables and growth in literacy across a whole school year for
students involved in a special intervention program. Other quantitative data
included information about schools and student background variables.
The quantitative data from the DART assessments provided clear information about
students’ levels of performance in the context of the various literacy programs and
strategies.
3.1 Quantitative and qualitative data
Two sets of quantitative data were collected:
1. background variable data on all participating Year 7 students, including gender,
whether or not language is the first or later language; Indigenous background;
parents’ occupation.
2. literacy achievement data, in DART reading and writing, from all participating
Year 7 students collected at the beginning of Year 7, and at the end of Year 7. The
DART assessment in reading was also conducted at the beginning and end of the
Monash summer school with the students involved in intensive tutorial sessions
incorporated in the course for teachers.
Three sets of qualitative data were collected:
8
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
1. observations and anecdotal comments from all teachers involved, collected in
logbooks kept in Semester 1 and Semester 2;
2. observations of the intervention program as enacted in 20 of the school sites,
focusing on the operation of the intervention program within the structures and
resources of the school curriculum and organisational structures;
3. fine-grained case studies of a Year 7 student in each of 10 of the participating
schools.
The range of qualitative data provided insights from a range of key perspectives,
and also reflected attitudinal changes in students’ approaches to literacy which
would not have been evident in the achievement data.
3.2 Literacy achievement data
All students in the study were assessed at the beginning and at the end of Year 7
using the ACER Developmental Assessment Resource for Teachers (DART) English for
Upper Primary/Junior Secondary (Forster et al, 1994).
These materials provided a means of mapping student growth in reading and
writing over the life of the study. The design of the DART makes it possible to assess
a range of achievement levels.
DART provides thematically integrated assessment activities which link sound
teaching practices with sound assessment practices, and thus offers a model of good
practice.
The DART materials include tasks for use with students from middle primary to
lower secondary levels of schooling. The five strands of reading, writing, viewing,
speaking, and listening can be assessed. In this project, two strands, reading and
writing, were used. In each strand, all tasks are linked onto a single common scale.
This scale allows for student achievement to be reported against CSF levels.
By using one set of DART materials at the beginning of the study and another at the
end, it was possible to map student growth in Year 7 and identify the changes in
literacy achievement.
3.3 Background variable data
A range of information was collected in order to investigate some of the factors
which may be associated with differences in achievement of students participating
in a variety of literacy intervention programs.
Student questionnaires and information sheets developed for 1996 National School
English Literacy Survey (NSELS) were used as a basis for the development of a
student questionnaire for this study. Information about variables such as gender,
socio-economic background, language background, school attendance, disabilities
which may require support, exposure to special programs in English literacy,
9
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
literacy activities and their frequency, and enjoyment of literacy activities was
gathered.
Survey instruments, in the form of three written questionnaires, were developed for
the 44 participating schools, focusing on the operation of the literacy program within
the structures and resources of the whole school curriculum.
The first questionnaire, the School Background Questionnaire, focused on the
implementation of the literacy program and strategies in terms of: general
characteristics of the school population; percentage of students from a language
background other than English, and from a Koorie background; special programs
and resources; approaches used to identify Year 7 students at educational risk.
The second questionnaire, the Student Information Sheet, collected information on:
 Country of origin/ethnic background;
 Language background;
 Student disability;
 Student school learning and/or behavioural difficulties;
 Student achievement in English literacy;
 School attendance;
 Parents’ occupations.
The third questionnaire, the Student Questionnaire, was designed to collect
information on how often English was spoken at home; a self-assessment of
achievement in English and Mathematics; time spent on homework, watching
television or videos, using computers; the range of texts read at home, and the range
of literacy activities practised at home; use of libraries; attitudes to reading and
writing in school.
3.4 Teachers’ observations and reflections
An important source of data on the implementation and effectiveness of the
intervention programs were the observations and reflections made by the
participating teachers during the whole period of the research.
Teachers directly involved in and responsible for literacy intervention programs are
in the best position to observe the day to day responses and progress of students
participating in the program, in the context of the classroom. They also have access
to a wide range of additional information including students’ interactions with other
teachers and students, students’ broader interests and achievements, their home
literacy practices, and their general behaviours.
Two logbooks, one for semester 1 and one for semester 2, were provided to all
teachers to complete at regular intervals. The logbooks were constructed as working
documents, allowing for teachers to develop their own areas of focus, depending on
their perspectives and philosophies, different school contexts, and the particular
intervention program. This information was valuable in understanding the actual
10
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
operation of the program or strategies, and enabled teachers to report trends and
particular insights, as well as the evidence of student development.
3.5 Site visits and observations of intervention programs
Twenty school sites were selected, representative of the full range of intervention
strategies and programs being investigated. These included:
* withdrawal intervention programs in groups and in one-to-one settings;
* whole group literacy strategies used in mixed ability classrooms;
* whole school literacy policies and organisational structures.
Two full-day visits were made to each of these 20 schools, covering the diversity of
intervention strategies and programs. The visits gave access to whole school data,
and classroom data. The collection of observational data within classrooms of the
sample schools provided insights into both the intended and enacted operation of the
range of intervention programs.
In addition, observations were made of Summer School programs at Monash and
Deakin Universities.
3.6 Case studies of individual students
Fine-grained case studies were conducted with 10 Year 7 students in 10 of the
participating schools.
Data collected for these case studies included
 teachers’ anecdotal records;
 field notes from researchers’ classroom observations, of both the focus students,
and the literacy experiences and activities made available to the students;
 samples of students’ writing; and
 tape recorded interviews with the teachers, students and their parents.
The data was used to develop detailed case studies of the students, including their
responses to the intervention program, the nature of their classroom behaviours, and
evidence of progress. These case studies were compared with individual
achievement data from the DART literacy assessments.
3.7 Evaluative criteria
The following criteria provided a framework for evaluating the whole body of data
relating to the intervention programs. They were used as prompts in the teacher
logbooks, and in discussions during site visits to schools.
 effectiveness for the target group (What progress do students make while
involved in the intervention program?)
 suitability for the target group (To what extent does the program engage
particular groups of students, such as NESB, boys, Koorie students?)
11
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
 CSF compatability (Is the overall approach and pedagogy of the program
consistent with CSF planning, programming and assessment?)
 resource effectiveness (What demands does the program make on school budgets
and human resources?)
 systemic viability (To what extent can the program be incorporated into
Department of Education structures?)
 transferability (To what extent does the program facilitate full participation by
intervention targeted students in mainstream classes?)
12
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
4. THE PROJECT SCHOOLS AND STUDENTS
The classroom is both a dynamic and social microcosm which provides an enjoyable and
caring environment for learning to evolve. Our many helpers maintain the consistency so
necessary for school to become a meaningful experience for students.
The set of three questionnaires provided background information about the schools
and students in the study.
39 schools returned the school background questionnaire and 1030 students
completed the student information sheets.
44 schools participated in the project – 30 government, 10 Catholic, and 4
Independent. Four of these schools were single sex, 2 boys only, 2 girls only. Forty of
the schools were co-educational.
52% of students were male, and 45.7% female.
89% of students in the study were born in Australia.
4.1 Funding levels



82% received funding for students with Special Learning Needs
20.5% of schools had 20% or fewer students who received the Educational
Maintenance Allowance
79.5% of schools had between 20% and 60% of students receiving the Educational
Maintenance Allowance.
This information indicates the extent to which the sample of schools matched the
required criteria for selection for the project.
4.2 Language background other than English and Koorie background
Percentage
of
students in school in
the category
Language
background
other
than English
none
1 – 5%
6 – 10%
11
20%
7.7%
41.0%
10.3%
5.1%
Koorie background
41%
41%
5.1%
2.6%
–
21
40%
7.7%
–
41
60%
7.7%
–
61%+
17.9%
48.7% of project schools reported having 5% or fewer students from language
backgrounds other than English, and 71.8% reported 40% or fewer in this category.
13
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
These figures suggest that students from language backgrounds other than English
needing literacy support would be receiving it through programs for learners of
English as a second language rather than through literacy intervention programs.
Of those students in the project not born in Australia, very few had been in Australia
for four years or less (3.6%). The language needs of these students would be met
through ESL learners’ programs. The small number of recent arrivals in the project
were not involved in specific interventions, but in some of the whole class
approaches and strategies.
The main language spoken at home was English in 79.4% of the reported cases; a
language other than English was spoken at home in 15.1% of reported cases. 59.3%
of students were reported to speak no languages than English at home; 22% were
reported to speak other languages than English at home. 10.6% of students were
reported as being able to speak but not read and write in another language. 1.7% of
students were reported as identifying themselves as being from a Koorie
background. 82% of schools reported having 5% or fewer students of Koorie
background.
The small number of students from language backgrounds other than English is
confirmed by information provided in the student questionnaire, where 73.8% of
students reported that they always spoke English at home. A further 13% reported
that they almost always spoke English at home.
4.3 Disabilities and learning difficulties
5% of in the whole group were reported to have a physical, intellectual, hearing,
visual or behavioural disability that entitled them to special education support
services and/or additional curriculum support.
In response to a question relating to student school learning and behavioural
difficulties, 65.4 % of students were described as having no difficulties at school, 9%
as having a general learning difficulty, 8.7 % as having a specific learning difficulty
in English literacy. 3.2% were described as having a behavioural difficulty.
4.4 Identification of literacy achievement at Year 7
The questionnaire sought information on the main approaches to the identification
of students entering Year 7 whose low literacy achievement places them at risk of
not making adequate progress at secondary school
Transition information from primary school
Test administered at the end of Year 6
Tests administered at the beginning of Year 7
Teacher observation
97.4%
23.1%
56.4%
94.9%
14
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
The transition information provided by primary schools, together with teacher
observation of students in Year 7 appear to be the major ways in which schools
identify students who might need additional support in literacy. It is also interesting
to note that over 50% of the schools reported the use of additional testing at the
beginning of year 7 to identify students at risk.
4.5 Perceptions of students’ achievement in literacy
Teachers’ estimation of the students’ achievement in English literacy indicated the
following range:
Strands in the English CSF:
Reading
Writing
Speaking and listening
Very well
26.4%
20.9%
29.2%
Quite well
43.3%
41.9%
47.9%
Not very well
26.2%
33%
19%
The higher estimates of students who appeared not to be performing very well in
Reading and Writing in comparison with Speaking and listening perhaps reflects the
emphasis of the literacy intervention programs on the identification of students
requiring additional support in reading and writing.
These estimates were supported by teachers’ overall rating of students as
demonstrating low achievement in English literacy
Teachers’ rating of the level of English literacy achieved by
individual students
Low (among the lowest 5 per cent of the class)
Below average (in the next 20%)
Average (in the middle 50 per cent of the class)
Above average (in the next 20% of the class)
High (in the top 5 per cent of the class)
13.6%
21.8%
32.9%
16.3%
11.7%
The teachers’ estimates against CSF strands and general achievement in English
clearly identify the wide range of ability of students involved in the literacy
programs identified for the project. The significant proportion of low and below
average achievers includes those students requiring support in a specific
intervention program; the above average and high achievers includes students in
those classes involved in whole class programs.
Students’ self-assessments in response to the question “Compared to most of the
students in Year 7, how well do you think you’re doing in English and maths?”
yielded the following information:
Very well
English
Maths
15
16.2%
21.5%
Better than
average
30.9%
26.5%
About
average
42.7%
36.9%
Not very
well
6.9%
10.5%
Very
poorly
0.6%
1.2%
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
It is interesting to note that only a very small number of students see themselves as
doing ‘not very well’ or ‘poorly’, compared to other students in Year 7. This
contrasts with the teachers’ estimates, but perhaps indicates the difficulties students
may have in comparing their own achievement with that of others, and a general
tendency to see themselves as ‘about average’.
4.6 Attendance
Information about attendance patterns indicated that 16% per cent of students had
missed no days of school up to the time of completing the questionnaire; 55.8% had
missed between one and five days. Overall, 86.8% of students had missed between
one and ten days of school. A small number of students were reported as having
missed more than ten days. Information supplied in the site visits suggested that
illness was often the reason for such absences, which is supported by the
questionnaire data that illness was the most usual reason for school absences for
56.2% of students in the cohort.
The information provided about primary schools attended by the students indicated
that most had attended one or two schools.
Primary schools attended
Only one school
One other school
Two other schools
Three or more other schools
56%
19.5%
7.5%
8.8%
4.7 Attitudes to reading and writing
How much do you like
reading things in class?
I enjoy reading a lot
I like reading most things
I like reading short things
I like the teacher reading
aloud
I don’t like reading at all
How much do you like
writing things in class?
30.9%
27.7%
22.9%
7.1%
I like writing a lot
I like writing most times
I like writing short pieces
I like writing some things
28.1%
33.9%
18.6%
10.1%
7.8%
I don’t like writing at all
5.4%
These responses indicate only moderate enjoyment of reading and writing in school.
This suggests a need to review classroom literacy practices in order to engage
students’ interests more effectively.
4.8 Students’ general literacy practices
The questionnaire provided an opportunity to gain a broad picture of some of
students’ general literacy practices. These included the range of text types read at
home, everyday literacy activities, time spent watching television, use of computers,
use of libraries, and purposes for reading. In the context of this project, this is very
16
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
generalised information, but nevertheless extends understanding of the diversity of
students’ experiences of literacy.
Text types read at home
Text type
Magazines
Books
Newspapers
Comics
Almost every day
21.5%
34.7%
20.6%
10%
About once a week
34.2%
30.6%
29.8%
14.1%
About once a month
24.2%
21.5%
18%
18.4%
Never or hardly ever
15.7%
9.2%
26.1%
51.5%
Everyday literacy activities
Literacy activity
Almost every day
Listen to things told
or read to you by
family or friends
Read things to your
family or friends
Talk
to
family
members
about
things you do at
school
Talk with family
members
about
things happening in
the world beyond
home and school
Translate things for
family members
Do shopping from a
written list
Write
down
telephone messages
37.4%
About
week
26.1%
once
a
About
month
13.2%
14%
29.7%
23.9%
29.1%
63.6%
19.7%
6.8%
6.8%
27.9%
32.5%
17%
18.8%
10.3%
12.9%
11.8%
60.2%
6.6%
24%
21.3%
44.6%
35.2%
27.6%
13.3%
20.1%
Hours spent watching television and videos
Hours watching TV or videos
outside school hours
More than 5 hours
Between 4 and 5 hours
Between 3 and 4 hours
Between 2 and 3 hours
Between 1 and 2 hours
Up to one hour
I do not watch TV or videos
17
Each week day
15.6%
11%
16.3%
19.9%
17%
9%
0.9%
Saturdays
Sundays
26.6%
12.6%
12.4%
14.6%
10.9%
5.4%
2.6%
and
once
a
Never or hardly
ever
19.1%
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
Using computers
This question was worded as follows: “If you use a computer at home or at school,
or at some other place, how often do you use the computer for doing the following
kinds of things?”
Computer activity
Almost every day
Playing
computer
games
Writing
or
word
processing
Sending and reading
email
Accessing the Internet
Using CD ROMs
Writing
computer
programs
28.1%
About
week
36.7%
once
a
About
month
15.5%
once
a
Never or hardly
ever
15.6%
23.8%
45.3%
17.5%
8.9%
7.7%
11.3%
13.2%
62.6%
14.8%
26.1%
5.4%
25%
31.4%
11.3%
14.4%
16.4%
12.3%
40.3%
21.2%
65.5%
Borrowing books from the library
Frequency of borrowing
More than once a week
About once a week
About once a month
Hardly ever
Never
From school library
14.2%
31.6%
24%
17.5%
7.4%
From public library
5.8%
10.4%
22.5%
24.9%
21.7%
The relatively limited amounts of library usage reported by students suggest the
need for increased collaboration between teacher librarians, class teachers, and
literacy support teachers.
Reading for different purposes
Students were asked, ”About how often do you read for the following purposes?”
Purpose for reading
For pleasure
To obtain information
To follow instructions or
directions
Almost
day
36.8%
21.8%
28.2%
every
About
week
30.7%
44.7%
30.7%
once
a
About once
month
16.1%
21.2%
22.1%
a
Hardly ever or
never
10.3%
4.6%
10%
The diversity of students’ literacy practices reported in the above responses to the
questionnaires, information about reading practices gleaned from the individual
student case studies, and the researchers’ observations during site visits suggest the
need for schools to investigate ways of acknowledging and utilising this diversity of
practices in classroom teaching programs, and in literacy intervention programs.
18
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
5. THE LITERACY PROGRAMS
The program has been operating for four years now and each year I have increased my
expectations and demands significantly. Each year I think I must have reached the limits of
what I can demand and expect, but the following year I find myself demanding and expecting
even more.
5.1 Schools and literacy programs
The following list indicates the main focus of the literacy programs and strategies in
the project schools. For the purposes of this study, in most schools one aspect of a
school’s program became the main focus of the study, even though other programs
or strategies might have been operating. In some cases, the data provided by schools
referred to combined programs.
It should be noted that the intention of the research was not to undertake
evaluations of particular programs, but to investigate and report on the
underpinning principles and contextual factors which improved students’ literacy
learning. Some programs and strategies were investigated in more than one school;
however, the context was different in each case. For example, some schools
conducted the Bridging the Gap program with volunteer tutors, but one school used
trained teacher aides to implement the program. One school implemented phases 1
and 2 of Making a Difference, whereas other schools implemented phase 1 in
association with other strategies. The lists of programs and strategies, and the varied
combinations of programs and strategies, highlights the significance of school
contextual factors in the commitment to a particular program
Laptop computers and PEEL strategies
Corrective Reading and First Steps strategies
Spalding program
Reading workshop
Bridging the Gap
Small group literacy classes; Making a Difference
Heather Harvey’s Intensive Reading
Bridging the Gap; whole school strategies
Individual learning plans; whole school strategies
Corrective Reading
Making a Difference
Sound Ways to Spelling, Reading and Writing
Whole school strategies
THRASS and Intensive Reading Program
Learning centres
Laptop computers; Modelled Reading; literacy tutors
Whole school strategies; literacy support program; THRASS
Spalding and small group tutoring
Bridging the Gap
Small withdrawal group; PEEL strategies
Bridging the Gap
Making a Difference
19
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
Intensive whole class program with aides
Bridging the Gap; home teacher for 60% of time
Sound Ways to Spelling, Reading and Writing
Making a Difference
Corrective Reading
Spalding; laptop computers
Small table teams
PEEL strategies; whole school literacy program
Cooperative learning and First Steps
Corrective Reading
Wide Reading; cross age tutoring
Spalding
Shared Guided Reading
First Steps; Making a Difference; reading circles
Modelled Reading
Bridging the Gap
Modelled Reading
Spalding
First Steps
Parent tutors
Intensive small group activities
Whole school strategies, including flexible groupings
The literacy programs investigated can be grouped into two broad categories. The
first category includes specific interventions for students identified as requiring
additional support in order to enable them to deal with the literacy demands of the
school curriculum. The second category includes whole class or school programs
and strategies designed to enhance literacy learning for all students, including those
students requiring support.
Specific interventions
Improving literacy learning for all students
Individual learning support
Team planning and teaching, including structures
allowing for flexible groupings and individual
support within the classroom
Making a Difference
Using laptop computers
Bridging the Gap
WA First Steps strategies
Direct Instruction
Reading)
Modelled Reading
(Corrective
Spalding (“The Writing Road to Reading”)
Guided reading, reciprocal teaching and other
targetted strategies
Small table teams
PEEL strategies
A third strand running across the school programs included involvement in
professional development programs, such as ESL in the Mainstream; Writing in the
Subject Areas (WISA); Julia Aitken; WA First Steps, and the implementation of
20
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
strategies gleaned form these programs. Many of the intervention programs, for
example, Making a Difference and the Spalding program include professional
development activities specific to the program.
Another major difference which distinguished the programs was whether the
support was provided by withdrawing students from the normal timetable to work
in one-to-one or small group situations, or whether the support was provided in the
context of the normal classroom. Within the classroom, support was provided from
various combinations of the following:






one-to-one
small group
team small groups
flexible groupings
team teaching
aides, including both trained teacher aides, and parent volunteers.
A range of personnel was involved in the programs, including English teachers;
teachers in various Key Learning Areas; teacher librarians; literacy coordinators;
teaching teams; aides; volunteer tutors; peer tutors; parents and other adults;
specialist support staff - eg, speech pathologists.
It was interesting to observe the variety of spaces in which literacy classes and
literacy tutoring operated: classrooms; small offices, rooms or other spaces; school
libraries; learning support centres. The more appropriate spaces allowed ready
access to resources and were appropriate for teaching in different groupings,
including one-to-one and small groups.
The operation of a number of programs was dependent on particular timetabling
arrangements, to accommodate withdrawal for one-to-one work; flexible groupings
and teaching teams; integrated programs where, for example, English and SOSE
were taught by the same teacher; and streaming. In one case, extra learning time was
provided in an after school program linked to the English/SOSE program.
Some programs were based on particular organisational structures within the school,
allowing for team teaching, in-class support, small group or individual withdrawal.
This was characteristic of many of the whole class approaches. By contrast, other
programs were designed to provide a particular format and sequence for literacy
teaching sessions. Programs such as Making a Difference, Bridging the Gap, and
Corrective Reading fit into this category. Another basis for the design of literacy
programs included a focus on content, or particular strategies, such as shared guided
reading, and the Spalding approach, with its strong emphasis on phonemes and
knowledge about language.
Withdrawal of students from class for extra support was involved in a number of
programs. This often involved one-to-one work with a tutor, as in Bridging the Gap,
Making a Difference, and other tutoring arrangements. In some cases, mostly in
21
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
country schools, tutors were volunteer parents, or other volunteer community
members. In other cases, withdrawal was organised for small groups of students, as
in Corrective Reading. Where withdrawal programs were organised, consideration
was usually given to making sure that the students did not regularly miss classes in
the same Key Learning Area, or classes in a learning area which the student
particularly enjoyed. In some cases, arrangements were made with the class teacher
for work requirements in the KLA to be modified for students in the withdrawal
program.
Issues relation to withdrawal identified in discussions in schools include students’
sometimes negative perceptions of being involved in special circumstances; reduced
opportunities for students to participate in learning activities in the classes missed;
the need to monitor attendance and punctuality at tutoring sessions, especially
where volunteer tutors are involved. Teachers generally reported that students who
had been involved in withdrawal programs tended to benefit from the working
relationship with one teacher over time, and to show increased confidence and
motivation.
Other arrangements observed included the provision of additional support for some
students in the context of the classroom. This was organised in a variety of ways,
including special timetabling arrangements; cooperative planning amongst teachers;
team teaching; flexible groupings of students; deployment of teaching aides;
involvement of volunteer helpers. These arrangements allowed for support to be
provided on a one-to-one basis where necessary, and for the support to occur within
the context of the teaching and learning program.
Coordinated approaches to highlighting literacy teaching in all curriculum areas
were observed in a number of schools. Several factors appear to be critical for the
effective establishment and maintenance of these approaches, including:
 strong support from the school leadership team;
 extensive professional development for teachers in all learning areas;
 a coordinating role for a teacher with considerable expertise in literacy;
 time for planning; team teaching;
 consideration given to literacy in course planning;
 use of common strategies in different KLAs.
The tables which follow in sections 5.2 and 5.3 identify the main features of the
programs and strategies for interventions out of class (5.2) and for whole class
literacy programs(5.3). The notes on the reported strengths and weaknesses of the
various programs are drawn from teacher logbooks and field notes from the site
visits.
22
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
5.2 Interventions out of class
Program
Making
Difference
a
Directorate of
School
Education,
Victoria, 1993
Features
Intensive
instruction
in
literacy in a one-to-one
teaching/learning situation;
Phase 2: Making a Difference
teacher supports a Year 7
subject teacher to plan for
and teach the student back in
the regular classroom
Variations: teaching in pairs
Bridging
Gap
the
Department of
Education,
Goulburn
North-Eastern
Region
A ten week, one-to-one
literacy
intervention
program
designed
for
students in Years 5-8 who
are experiencing difficulty in
reading and writing; aims at
minimum of three sessions
per week; school facilitator;
community volunteers
Variations:
paid
aides
instead
of
community
volunteers; two sessions per
week;
include
more
comprehension;
use
of
novels
from
English
program
Reported strengths

One-to-one interaction,
rapport with tutor

Six
different
components of program
provide variety

Students can read high
interest texts

Cooperative approach

Increases confidence

Phase
2
learning
strategies/activities
enriched
the
class
program; meant that
progress
made
by
students is noticed by
more people

Regular record keeping
to track progress
Reported weaknesses

Withdrawal
–
but
mostly
caused
no
difficulties

Difficult to ensure that
reading was being done
at home

Difficult for students
when they are tired

Timetabling: time of day
for
sessions;
interruptions; covering
absences of MAD tutors

Possibly don’t need to
complete the lesson
format every lesson –
can become repetitive

High costs for small
number of students

Absenteeism

Communication
between staff involved
with withdrawal group
and
larger
school
picture – needed time







Impact of individual
attention one-to-one on
students’
self-esteem
and confidence; gives
sense of achievement
Flexibility – can be
adapted
to
target
students’ needs
Diagnostic – tutor can
identify more specific
weaknesses
High interest – students
can choose some books
read
Most benefit to students
who do not have serious
learning difficulties, and
who are not too far
behind their peers
Gives
students
confidence to use the
skills in the normal
classroom








23
Finding
suitable
volunteers;
trained
tutors
have
limited
repertoire of strategies
Time
for
training
volunteers
Continuity of volunteers
Timetabling
Concerns
over
withdrawal
Time
intensive
for
program facilitator complex coordination –
with
student
coordinators,
class
teachers,
students,
parents, principal, and
tutors
Finding
appropriate
spaces
Following
up
on
students who don’t
come to session
Cut-up sentence loses
impact
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
Program
Intensive
Reading
Program
for
Secondary
School
Students,
by
Heather
Harvey © 1992
Intensive
Reading
Programs
Features
Student workbook; reading
texts; ten units over 12
weeks. A-level designed for
students 1 or 2 years behind
peers.
Small groups withdrawn
from class, 4 sessions per
week. Each unit teaches a
reading rule; a vocabulary
list; oral reading; word
meanings; comprehension.
Variations: three sessions
per week (time available)
Reported strengths

Continuity

Frequency

Constant repetition

Improved concentration
and involvement

Gains in confidence

Students willing to take
risks in small groups;
small groups promote
cooperative learning

Games – help with
motivation
Corrective
Reading
Students
grouped
on
placement test to create
small homogenous groups;
series of structured lessons;
mastery learning; selected
reading
passages
and
activities. Programs provide
scripted directions for the
teacher.
Easy-to-difficult
contexts.

Decoding and
Comprehension
Programs,
within Direct
Instruction
Programs
S Engelmann et
al
McGraw Hill





Modelled
Reading
Reading process is modelled
by a competent reader.
Students matched in pairs,
one weak reader (tutee), one
strong
reader
(tutor).
Stronger readers trained as
tutors. Sessions held 4 days
per week for 20 minutes.
Appropriate
reading
resources from school library
(and
students
bring
additional material).





Positive
impact
of
staging
and
order,
repetition and practice,
affective
elements
setting
goals
and
rewarding progress
number of students who
can be supported in
small group withdrawal
achievement increased
students’ confidence
material a guide for
teachers and students,
feedback
such
as
mastery tests gives clear
indication of areas to
work on.
Students succeeding in
CR displayed increased
willingness to attempt
tasks in mainstream
classes
and
engage
actively in learning
Student
leadership
roles;
relationships
between different year
levels
Link
pastoral
care,
developing self-esteem,
literacy
assistance,
organisational support
Increases
confidence;
promotes
cooperative
and supportive learning
environment
Provides
regular
structured
time
on
reading
Simple to implement
and resource cheap
Reported weaknesses

Timetabling

Staffing (costs)

Withdrawal – needs to
be
from
different
classes;
students
reluctant
to
miss
practical classes

Best
delivered
by
trained teachers or aides
– staffing implications

Lack of time to cover all
activities,
including
word games

Some students needed
more time for units

Issues
relating
to
withdrawal, including
timetabling

Age
and
cultural
appropriateness
of
program materials

Difficulties with multiaged withdrawal groups

Timetabling




Students’ organisational
difficulties in getting to
sessions
Student
concerns
regarding
suitable
reading material
Student tutors with
weakest
readers
experienced
greatest
challenges
Not suitable for all
students, eg, students
requiring an intensive
skills based program
24
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project

Strategies can be used in
all KLAs.
5.3 Whole class literacy programs
Program
First Steps
Education
Department
of
WA, Longman
25
Features
Developmental Continua for
reading,
writing
and
spelling. Links assessment to
teaching, provides range of
teaching strategies
Reported strengths

Capacity to include all
students regardless of
ability

Cooperative,
small
group strategies

Routine

Assessment processes

Fosters recognition of
value of contact with
primary schools

Value of ‘modelling’
strategies;
problem
solving strategies for
writing; games

Affirmation of drafting
and editing process

Strategies useful in all
KLAs; eg, integrating
literacy
development
into SOSE

Evidence of renewed
confidence
to
read,
aloud and silently, and
to write.
Reported weaknesses

Restrictions of the 50minute session

Room environment and
layout for group activity

Preparation time
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
Program
THRASS
Teaching
Handwriting and
Spelling Skills
THRASS
(Australia)
Pty
Ltd and THRASS
(UK) Ltd
The
Spalding
Method
(Spalding
Education
Foundation
Australia)
of
Features
Chart with 44 phoneme
boxes, one box for each
phoneme, which contain the
main graphemes for the
phoneme. Charts can be
used throughout school, for
teaching, and to identify the
nature of spelling mistakes
Reported strengths

THRASS
spelling
choices provided access
for class word study and
reading

Promotes awareness of
alternatives
in
representing sounds

THRASS chart provides
backup, memorisation
of
chart
adds
to
phonemic back up

Encourages listening to
what is actually heard in
a word
 Provides strategies and
practice
Reported weaknesses

Secondary
students
found format “babyish”
A structured program in
spelling,
reading
and
writing. Training provided
at two levels: Spalding 1
Learning to Read and Write
(focus
on
precise
handwriting and spelling,
basis
for
developing
programs suited to their
grade level); Spalding 2
Reading and Writing to Learn
(emphasises comprehension
and the writing process).
Students learn phonograms
and rules.








Structured
and
predictable (oral and
written
phonogram
review;
spelling/dictation/writ
ing
tasks;
comprehension)
Cumulative,
lots
of
reinforcement
and
repetition
Provides students with
knowledge
about
language (phonograms
and rules)
Precise monitoring of
students’ progress
Sufficiently challenging
for mixed-ability classes
Program is a complete
methodology which can
be applied to the
English KLA
Provides teachers with a
common language to
talk about literacy



Predictability
and
boredom
Highly
prescriptive
nature of the program
Difficulties in managing
with large class sizes
Attendance
26
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
6. SCHOOL SITE VISITS AND OBSERVATIONS
Powerpoint presentations were a huge success. The students really enjoyed creating these and
made full use of the colour/sound/movement options. They seemed to appreciate the trust I
put in them in letting them use my laptop and enjoyed helping each other as they discovered
new possibilities.
6.1 Focus of the school visits
The main purpose of the school visits was to observe the operation of the
intervention strategies and programs being undertaken in each school. A whole day
was spent in the school, and the school coordinators helped to plan the day in order
to maximise the opportunities for the research team to gather relevant information
about the intervention program being implemented. The classroom observations
proved to be an important focus of the visits. Activities involved in the site visits
included:
 interviews with principals; teachers (both mainstream teachers, and teachers
involved in intervention programs); teacher aides; students; parents; curriculum
coordinators; literacy coordinators;
 analysis of school documents such as attendance records, curriculum policy
documents, documents relating to the identification of students at risk, reporting
documents, and assessment records;
 consideration of teachers’ planning and recording strategies; the range and use of
texts and other resources; teaching and learning strategies; strategies for
monitoring student progress; behaviours of students; roles of support personnel
such as teaching aides and parent volunteers;
 observation of students in classroom settings, including settings for the
intervention program, and mainstream classes.
The first round of visits took place in Terms 1 and 2, when some schools were at the
stage of full implementation of the literacy programs and strategies, while others
were still at the planning stage, or waiting for staff to undertake relevant
professional development. In some cases, in this first round, schools were still in the
process of identifying students who need extra literacy support.
From this first round of visits, a range of issues was identified:
 the importance of appropriate professional development;
 the fragility of some programs (continuity from year to year, staff changes);
 the variety of approaches used to identify students at risk;
 ambivalence about the relative value of withdrawal or in-class support;
27
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project




the feasibility of various organisational and special timetabling arrangements;
advantages and disadvantages of the use of volunteer parent support;
the quality of program content and strategies;
the appropriateness of resources.
Each of these visits occupied a full day. The visits provided the opportunity to
collect detailed information on the rationale and operation of the program/strategies
in the context of the particular school, and to observe students in classrooms.
The second round of visits, undertaken in Term 4, followed the same flexible format
as the first round of visits made in Term 1 and 2. The second round of visits focused
particularly on evidence of student development and achievement in relation to the
literacy intervention programs and strategies. All programs had by that stage been
operating for much longer than at the time of the first visit, and some had
progressed to further stages (for example, the second stage of Making a Difference).
The second round of visits provided comprehensive information on many aspects of
implementing and maintaining the range of intervention programs and strategies. In
the case of the whole school programs, it was only through having been on site that
it was possible to understand the dimensions and operation of the program.
Extensive field notes were recorded.
6.2 Key questions in the second round of visits
A set of key questions provided the focus for each of the visit to schools in the
second round. The list of questions was sent to schools prior to the visit.






What progress have the targeted students made as a result of the intervention
program?
What evidence supports this judgement?
Has the program been appropriate for all students in the target group? If not,
specify.
How is the intervention program linked to the mainstream teaching and learning
program?
To what extent has the program enabled the student/s to participate fully in
mainstream class activities?
What demands has the program made on school resources – human and
financial? Can these be sustained in the future?
Responses to discussions in schools centred around these questions provided useful
insights.
What progress have the targeted students made as a result of the intervention
program?
All schools reported that some progress in literacy achievement had been observed
for the targeted students, except where poor attendance, ill-health or major
28
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
behavioural problems were involved. Significantly, improvements in confidence,
self-esteem and motivation were noted more than any other aspect.
What evidence supports this judgement?
A variety of evidence was cited as being indicative of development. This included:
 specific information gathered from spelling and comprehension tests;
 observations of library borrowing and amounts of reading completed by
students, and increased fluency and speed;
 teachers’ reports of increased completion of work in and out of class;
 students’ reading logs;
 CSF levels data;
 portfolios of student work samples had been gathered (not commonly reported);
 anecdotal reports of literacy improvements from students’ teachers;
 anecdotal reports of students’ increasing confidence;
 students’ oral presentations (group presentations for small table teams, Power
Point presentations)
 perceived changes in levels of parents’ concern.
Has the program been appropriate for all students in the target group? If not,
specify.
Most reports were positive, and teachers and tutors reported that students who
needed support had been correctly identified. Specific groups mentioned in response
to this question included ESL students, for whom some most literacy intervention
programs, and their needs involved learning English as a second language. In a
number of cases, it was reported that the program had been modified to cater for the
observed needs of students; for example, a student who read aloud fluently was seen
to need less reading practice and more help with writing, which was an area of
concern.
How is the intervention program linked to the mainstream teaching and learning
program?
This was identified as a difficulty. Literacy coordinators, and those responsible for
the coordination of withdrawal intervention programs reported on the complexities
of establishing and maintaining structures for communication between literacy
tutors and teachers, and regular classroom teachers. The lines of communication
between students, parents, tutors and classroom teachers were also described as
being complex to manage. The most desirable arrangement was seen to involve
teams helping the student, who were in regular communication, but it was generally
reported that this was difficult to achieve. Limited time for such coordination and
communication was seen as the biggest problem.
The second phase of Making a Difference, as fully implemented in one school,
provides an effective model for linking the intervention program to the mainstream
teaching and learning program.
29
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
To what extent has the program enabled the student/s to participate fully in
mainstream class activities?
All answers to this question were anecdotal. In some cases the literacy coordinator
had attempted to survey a student’s class teachers, or had discussed the child’s
progress with them. Generally some improvements were noted, often in self-esteem
and confidence, and in organisation. Literacy improvements noted were often in
terms of spelling, and less apparent difficulty with reading texts in class.
Teachers and literacy coordinators were in agreement that it was important to
determine the transferability of learning from the intervention program to the full
curriculum, but seemed not to have systematic ways of monitoring and measuring
this.
What demands has the program made on school resources – human and financial?
Can these be sustained in the future?
The most significant demand on school resources was staffing. In a number of cases,
staffing, in terms of teacher time, or teaching aides made possible by the research
grant for the project could not be sustained the following year. This was linked to the
matter of relevant personnel having sufficient time to plan and liaise between those
involved in literacy programs and teachers in all key learning areas. Also linked to
staffing was a concern at the limited number of places in intensive programs for
students who were seen to be able to benefit from such support. Teachers and tutors
were aware that their program helped students, and would often have liked to be
able to extend this help to other students who had fallen behind their peers.
Another important resource was dedicated, fairly private space for intervention
programs. A variety of spaces was used, including rooms adjacent to the school
library, rooms in a literacy support centre, small classrooms around the school. The
attractiveness and suitability of these spaces varied considerably. One school which
ran an intensive program in class, with a team combining a teacher and a number of
aides, was always timetabled into the same room, adjacent to the literacy office. This
was seen to be of great benefit.
Appropriate texts for use in intervention program had been built up over time, or
purchased more recently.
The expertise of staff in literacy education, acquired from involvement in
professional development activities was seen as a critical resource. In a number of
schools, literacy coordinators and other teachers had been able to take part in a
number of key literacy professional development programs, such as Writing in the
Subject Areas and ESL in the Mainstream. Professional knowledge about literacy
education had sometimes built up over time, and was shared by a number of
teachers. This was recognised as a valuable resource. Another important resource
was the experienced literacy coordinator who could provide professional
development for other staff members and key learning area teams, as well as ‘just-in30
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
time’ advice for all teachers. Where such expertise existed in a school, programs
could be sustained over several years; where a key staff member left, the fragility of
some programs was immediately obvious.
6.3 Issues identified from school observations
Many interesting issues emerged from the school observations. The following issues
are of particular interest:
 maintenance of programs over time, and when staff changes occur;
 the significance of support from the school leadership team;
 connections between student learning activities in intervention programs and the
main curriculum;
 varied levels of course development and documentation of agreed courses;
 the roles of literacy coordinators or specialists;
 the roles of volunteer tutors;
 the actual range of opportunities for students to read and write sustained texts
 impact of students’ involvement in literacy programs on reducing incidents
relating to discipline and welfare.
An area for further investigation identified from the observations concerns the
nature and range of texts used in intervention programs. The range includes highinterest, simple-language fiction, such as the Zapper and the After Dark series;
newspapers; non-fiction texts in the student’s interest area; text passages in
commercial intervention programs. These vary in complexity, cultural
appropriateness and quality. In few of the intervention programs were students
working with texts in use in their normal classroom program.
All schools visited expressed appreciation of the special grant which enabled them
to implement their selected programs and strategies in the most effective way
possible. Most were unsure how they would be able to continue the present level of
operation next year from within their own resources.
6.4 Homework
An area of specific interest discussed during the school visits was homework.
Further information about homework practices was present in the questionnaires,
and in the individual student case studies.
A majority of students who responded to the questionnaire students reported that
they did some hours of homework each week. 40.6% reported doing 1 –2 hours, and
almost the same percentage (39.9 %) reported that they did between 3 – 5 hours. A
small proportion (14.7%) reported doing more than 6 hours of homework per week.
Only 1.5 % reported doing no homework at all.
Discussions during the school visits indicated that schools used a variety of
approaches to setting literacy–related homework, including:
 wide reading of novels for English
31
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project




completion of work begun in class
work on specific homework tasks
work on special tasks and projects designed to involve some work in class time
and some work at home
structured homework sheets, sometimes from commercially available sources.
One teacher of an English/SOSE class included an explicit focus on homework in
her teaching program, as a strategy for improving and sustaining students’ literacy
skills, and noted that:
The homework program is particularly important during semester one as it increases
the amount of reading/comprehension done by the students and therefore the rate of
progress of the students. These students typically have a history of not reading when
required to do so.
From the individual students case studies it was evident that the literacy activities
the students did at home provided a useful connection between home and school,
opportunities for parents to observe their child's development, and to provide
support:
Now she’ll come across a word … the other day she said ‘how do you spell emergency’
and I said, ‘you think about it, how do you think you would spell it?’ She got stuck
with the first letter, the ‘e’, because she was saying ‘amergency’ so she thought it had
to start with an ‘a’ but once she got the ‘e’ she was right. She could spell it after that./
He has a homework program as well, which we sit and do and have a bit of fun. He
brought home a new book last night and did three pages of that. There were a couple of
words he didn’t know so he pulled out the dictionary and looked them up. He has to
read a passage and answer questions. He knows now if you can’t answer the questions
you need to go back. If you can’t answer the question right you obviously haven’t read
it properly. I think it’s marvellous and I only wish he’d had it earlier.
Given the prevalence of time reportedly spent on homework, further investigation of
the connections between improvement in literacy achievement and different
approaches to literacy-related homework merits further investigation.
Help with homework
In response to the question, “When you work at home on school work (such as set
homework or projects), how often do you get help from family members, other
adults or your friends?”, 27.1% of students reported that they usually get help, and a
further 50.5% reported that they sometimes get help. 17.1% indicated that they
hardly ever get help, and 1.5% indicated that they did not work on school work at
home. Thus 77.6% of students usually or sometimes get help.
32
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
A further question was asked “If you do get help at home with school work, what
kinds of things do you need help with?” Answers to this open-ended question
indicated five main categories.
Kinds of things where help is
needed at home
Reading
Writing
Spelling
Maths
Looking things up
Other
% of students
1.4%
2.6%
12.9%
22.3%
4.1%
25.2%
More detailed investigation could help to identify patterns of the kinds of help
required, and the nature and design of homework activities.
6.5 Literacy teaching strategies
A review of the teacher logbooks, and the field notes from site visits, made it clear
that teachers across the project schools practised a very wide repertoire of literacy
teaching strategies. These have been derived from many sources; from professional
development programs such as WISA; resources such as First Steps; particular
project such as PEEL; teacher professional association conferences; research projects;
and from teachers’ own classroom experience. Many of these were discussed at
length during site visits, and in the logbooks. Within the context of different schools’
particular programs, all were seen to be effective.
The table which follows groups these strategies into five major categories: structures
and organisation; teaching and learning strategies; ways of fostering wide reading;
monitoring development; and the use of information technology. It is interesting to
note the value placed on wide reading, and to see some indication of the ways in
which schools encourage this aspect of literacy development. The use of information
technology increases and will continue to do so; the strategies listed here indicate
only what was actually seen in the course of the project.
This list is not comprehensive, and does not represent all strategies teachers in
project schools use in their literacy teaching; it summarises what was reported or
observed on site visits, or in the teacher logbooks. The list could provide a basis for
the development of advice to schools on ways of expanding the repertoire of literacy
support strategies.
33
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
CATEGORY
Structures and organisation
STRATEGY
Team teaching
Flexible groupings
Aides and tutors in class
Small table teams
Time with teachers – English and SOSE
taught by same teacher
Integrating literacy development into
teaching SOSE
Cross age tutoring
Cooperative
learning
structures
(inclusive of all students)
Learning centres (small groups)
Teaching and learning strategies
Modelled reading (cross age tutoring)
PEEL Strategies (New dictation, unusual
creative writing,
Shared guided reading
Lightning writing
Reciprocal teaching
First
Steps
strategies
(reflection,
recording, reporting)
3 Level Guide
Cloze
Data chart
Writing journals
34
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
Fostering wide reading
Regular private reading
beginning of lessons
Carrying a novel at all times
Reading logs
Readers’ Circles
Monitoring development
First steps continuum
Observation
Testing
Writing Folders
Information technology
Class room access to computers
Laptop computers
Software – “Inspiration”, “Interactive
Picture Dictionary” (Protea Textware,
1995) Powerpoint, Hyper studio.
time
at
7. THE DART ASSESSMENTS
DART assessments begins. I expected a negative response, but as usual they have done the
unexpected. They have decided they are going to show [ACER] what they are capable of.
7.1 The DART Reading and Writing Assessment Tasks
The Developmental Assessment Resource for Teachers
The Developmental Assessment Resource for Teachers (DART) was selected to provide
measures of students’ literacy achievement in March (Term 1) and November (Term
4) for this project. DART is an assessment package consisting of classroom activities
developed around a central text, the film Danny’s Egg. Assessment tasks for viewing,
reading, writing, speaking and listening are integrated with the activities. The DART
materials were used in 1996 for the National School English Literacy Survey
(NSELS).
Students’ performances on the DART assessment tasks can be interpreted in terms of
the strands of and levels of the nationally-developed English profile (Australian
Education Council, 1994). The levels of the Victorian Curriculum and Standards
Framework (CSF) match the English profile levels, thus making it possible to report
students’ achievement in this Successful Interventions project against CSF levels. The
project specifications included a list of criteria for the comparative evaluation of
35
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
intervention programs and resources, one of which CSF compatibility. The reporting
of students’ achievement against the levels of the English CSF is therefore relevant to
the application of this criterion.
The Reading and Writing DART assessment tasks
The Reading and Writing DART assessment tasks were selected for the literacy
assessment in the Successful Interventions project, for use in March and November.
The two Reading forms, A and B, were used. Form A is easier than Form B, and was
used in March, while Form B was appropriate for use in November. Two sets of
prompts, A and B were available for Writing, and were used in March and
November respectively. Students’ achievements for these literacy assessments were
reported on scales based on the levels of English Curriculum and Standards Framework
for Reading and Writing.
For Reading, schools were provided with the full colour magazine-style Reading
Collection A in February and Reading Collection B in November, and the Answer
Booklet A or B. The tasks required students to read a range of text types, and then to
answer questions about what they had read.
For Writing A they were provided with an Answer Booklet which included the
writing prompts, for three tasks:
 Personal/narrative: choice of two topics, “Taking care” or “The Note”;
 Exposition, giving a point of view about an issue, “Television”;
 Specific purpose, “Pet Show Letter”.
Writing B matched the purposes for writing of Writing A, but provided different
prompts:
 Personal/narrative: “The Map”;
 Exposition, giving a point of view about an issue, “Where to Live: The city or the
bush”;
 Specific purpose, “Book Week Parade Letter”.
Both of the letter tasks were designed as part of larger tasks including small group
and whole class discussion.
Implementing the DART assessments in project schools
The 44 project schools were asked to complete the DART Reading and Writing
assessments with all Year 7 students involved in the literacy intervention program or
strategies which had been identified as the focus of their school’s involvement in the
project. A variety of arrangements had been negotiated, such as:
 a group of students, from one Year 7 class, identified for involvement in a
specific intervention program;
 students from different Year 7 classes participating in the same literacy
intervention program;
36
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
 all students identified as needing additional support through a one-to-one
withdrawal program;
 literacy support groups time-tabled at the same time as LOTE classes;
 one year 7 class undertaking a common literacy program or strategies’
 a mainstream English class implementing a literacy program inclusive of all
students.
These arrangements meant that students undertaking the DART assessments
encompassed a broad range of abilities, including students in mixed-ability
classrooms; students whose literacy achievement was just below that of their peers;
and students whose low levels of literacy achievement meant that they had been
identified as needing extra support.
The first set of DART assessments provided the entry level student achievement data
for this study. It had been planned that both the Reading and Writing assessments
would be completed by the end of February, but this proved difficult in most
schools, due to school priorities such as special orientation programs, Year 7 camps,
or screening test programs. The four or five sessions of class time required to
complete the DART activities also meant that in many schools the assessments
needed to continue into March.
The DART materials were sent to all project schools at the beginning of February,
allowing time for teachers to familiarise themselves with the materials before
implementing the assessment activities. An overview of the materials had been
presented at the project briefing conference, but teachers needed time to read
through the administration guidelines and the actual assessment materials. All
schools were sent teacher administration guides for Reading and Writing, and sets of
student materials. The possibility of spreading the Reading and Writing assessment
tasks over time, perhaps a couple of weeks, was suggested to all teachers. Teachers
were encouraged to follow the administration guides provided, given the
importance of the analysis of the student data for the whole research project.
Local school arrangements meant that in some cases the students did the
assessments in their English classes, while in other cases the students did the DART
activities under the supervision of the literacy co-ordinator or literacy support
teacher.
Comments from the teacher logbooks indicate some of the responses to the first set
of DART assessments:
 Organising students from different classes
Our main problem was administering the DART tests to targetted students, as the
students came from 3 different classes. All students were withdrawn and tested as a
group. We found that with the class discussion for the letter – planning a pet show –
the students worked very well, with all students in the group participating. These
students, when in a mixed ability classroom, would normally have sat back and
37
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
contributed. (Written work did not indicate how well the students covered the topic in
discussion and brainstorming.)
 Time needed for the assessments
Once 7A was established as our target group and testing from ACER had to be
administered, their English teacher and I set up testing times over a period of a week.
The testing was lengthy and as a result their usual curriculum had to be reorganised.
Modifications to their current project were made in accordance.
The program took longer than I had anticipated to implement. It had to be spread over
3-4 weeks. Pet Show letter task was very enjoyable.
 Impact of DART on the English program
Administered DART: have noted a lack of continuity to our normal English program
which this has caused (but Year 7 camp in Week 3 – the whole week – has also
contributed). DART has given a different emphasis to our program – not necessarily a
disadvantage though. DART tests have given us a ‘quick’ picture, particularly of
writing habits, processes and practices of our students.
The materials for the second DART assessment were sent to schools in October, for
use in November with the same students who had completed the DART assessment
in Term 1. The covering letter suggested that the reading and writing assessment
tasks might be spread over some time, perhaps a couple of weeks, and that teachers
could try to incorporate the assessment tasks into the normal English teaching
program. The November DART assessment provided a measure of the end of year
achievement, enabling comparisons to be made with the Term 1 entry level data.
Student responses to the November DART assessment as described in the teacher
logbooks varied:
The most impressive change was when they underwent the second lot of DART
testing. I thought it might be a problem and they might react negatively because we
have regular testing. But I was wrong. The concentration and effort put into the tests
was impressive.
Students found the tests difficult. Tried very hard to get out of doing them. Melissa
dug her heels in and said she ‘can’t read it’. Corrective Reading and Bridging the Gap
students tested separately from the rest of the class.
Assessment of the student responses
The student responses to both DART assessments were assessed at ACER, by a team
of trained assessors experienced in marking DART tasks. In preliminary moderation
sessions, the team discussed the tasks and marking guides, and jointly marked
common samples of students’ work before beginning the actual assessments.
Throughout the assessment period they worked as team, to discuss and reach
38
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
agreement on appropriate assessments for student responses which varied from the
marking guide
7.2 Reporting Evidence of Development
The primary purpose of the DART March and November assessments was to
provide empirical data to enable comparisons to be made of the relative impact on
Year 7 student’s literacy achievement of the various literacy intervention programs
and strategies in which they had participated.
This data is a key element on the evaluation of the literacy intervention programs
and strategies, particularly in relation to two of the evaluative criteria provided in
the project brief:
 Effectiveness for the target group (What rate of progress do the students make
using the intervention program?)
 Suitability for the target group (To what extent does the program engage
particular groups of students such as Non-English Speaking background
students, boys or Koorie students?)
Reporting to schools: Student Achievement Reported on the DART Scales
All schools received detailed reports of their students’ achievement on the DART
assessments. The first set of reports was sent in Term 2: individual student reports
for Reading and Writing (Content and Language) and school group reports for
Reading and Writing. The second set of reports was sent to schools at the
commencement of Term 1, 2000. These reports displayed both the March and
November achievements on individual student reports, and on reports for each
school group.
The information presented in the reports could be used by schools for diagnostic
purposes, for planning and evaluating teaching programs, and for negotiating
individual learning plans. The reports included a note to teachers about the
importance of reading the reports in association with other assessment information
collected and recorded during the year.
The results of the Reading and Writing assessments were recorded on scales based
on the levels of the English Curriculum and Standards Framework, which describes the
literacy skills that are typically displayed by students at this level. Beside the scale of
CSF levels the reports displayed a set of indicators describing each level of
achievement. In general, students will find the aspects of literacy described by
indicators below their reported achievement easy to do, and those above their
position difficult, assuming they can do them at all.
The individual student reports showed the student’s achievement in both the March
and November assessments indicated by arrows on each of the scales for Reading,
39
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
Writing (Content) and Writing (Language). The white arrows indicated March
results and the black arrows November results.
The school reports for Writing (Content) and Writing (Language) showed the mean
scores of the March and November assessments by arrows on each of the scales for
Writing (Content), and Writing (Language). The white arrows indicated March
results and the black arrows November results. The white and black bars adjacent to
the CSF scales showed the achievements of the middle 60% of all Year 7 students
who undertook the two DART Writing assessments.
The DART Reading report for schools, sheet 1, showed CSF levels, and provided a
set of indicators describing each level of achievement. In general, students will find
the aspects of literacy described by indicators below their reported achievement easy
to do, and those above their position difficult, assuming they can do them at all. The
white and black bars adjacent to the CSF scales show the achievements of the middle
60% of all Year 7 students who undertook the two DART assessments.
The second DART Reading sheet showed the scores of all students from each school
for the March Reading assessment (white markers) and the November Reading
assessment (black markers). The white and black arrows, printed beside the CSF
levels, show the mean scores for the group of students from the school for the March
and November assessments. Schools were provided with a list of ID numbers to
enable them to locate individual student performances from the IDs printed at the
bottom of the page.
Samples of each of the reports follow.
40
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
41
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
42
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
43
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
44
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
45
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
46
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
47
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
7.3 Trends in the achievement data
More detailed analyses of the DART reports has explored the impact of the various
intervention programs on students’ literacy achievement. Several broad trends are
apparent in the whole set of school reports.






The March DART assessment showed that the achievements of students from
across the 44 project schools was spread across Levels 2 – 5 of the CSF. This
matched the expected range of achievement for these students. The whole cohort
of students in the project included students who had been identified as needing
support in a range of special programs, including one-to-one teaching, and
whole classes of students where particular strategies of programs were intended
to enhance the literacy achievement of all students.
The November DART assessments showed students’ achievements spread across
Levels 3 – 5. Only a very small number of students achieved level 2 in this
assessment.
The March achievements in Writing were, in general, lower than the Reading
achievements.
The November achievement in Writing, for both Content and language showed
considerable improvement across the whole cohort of students.
The achievements of students across all schools who had achieved Levels 2 or 3
for Reading in the March assessments showed significant improvement in the
November assessments.
The achievements of students across all schools who had achieved Levels 4 or 5
for reading in the March assessments showed relatively little change. The
achievements of some students in this group declined between March and
November.
Analysis of the various background variables, such as gender and attitudes to
reading, as well as the particular programs showed no significant correlations. In the
case of writing a difference between boys’ and girls’ performance was discerned, in
favour of girls.
A multilevel analysis of all data for focused on the questions: what proportion of
variance in students’ reading scores on the second DART Reading assessment are
due the clustering effect of students within classes and schools? and how much of
the variance between the two Reading assessments is accounted for by the prior
knowledge demonstrated in the first reading assessment, gender, and the literacy
intervention programs? For the purpose of this analysis the programs were clustered
in two broad categories of specific interventions for targetted students and literacy
strategies aimed at enhancing literacy achieving for all students. In addition, four
programs: Making a Difference, Bridging the Gap, the Spalding method, and Corrective
Reading were clustered.
The proportion of residual variance in the achievement on the second DART
Reading assessment due to between-school differences was 23.8%. When this
48
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
seemingly large variance was adjusted for prior achievement (the first Dart Reading
assessment) the prior achievement was a significant predictor of the second
assessment and accounted for 44.6% of the variance in the second reading
assessment.
Further analysis indicated that neither gender nor any of the intervention programs
had significant effects in explaining the variation of the second reading assessment.
At this point, a significant 14.3% of the residual variance remains at the class/school
level.
Analysis of class/school-level variables was conducted to identify those schools that
might warrant further investigation in terms of (1) Better than expected students
performance, given the fitted explanatory variables and (2) worse than expected
students performance. The diagram below indicates the outcomes of this analysis.
49
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
From this diagram it can be seen that seven schools appear above the central dotted
line, indicating that the analysis of the data, allowing for all the explanatory
variables, showed better than expected performance.
Further consideration of the literacy programs and strategies implemented by these
schools indicated that three of the schools were implementing a specific intervention
strategy, which was linked with other school policies and strategies. The other four
schools were implementing literacy strategies in mainstream classes, and allowing
for individual support within these mainstream programs. The common feature in
all of the schools is the explicit connection between the mainstream program and
literacy support.
The tables below indicate the focus of the literacy intervention program or strategy
selected by each of the seven schools identified by the multilevel analysis as
warranting further consideration. The tables summarise the context in which these
interventions were implemented, in relation to whole school policies, approaches to
literacy in all key learning areas, and the individual support for students requiring
additional assistance with literacy.
The first table (page 49) relates to the schools which implemented a specific literacy
intervention program, linked with other school literacy policies and strategies.
The second table (pages 50-51) includes the schools providing for literacy support
within the mainstream program.
50
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
Focus
of
literacy
intervention
Making
a
Difference,
Phases 1 and 2
Whole school
Literacy in all KLAs
Individual support
Literacy
coordinator’s
position supported by
school administration.
Phase 2 extends into mainstream
curriculum classes.
One to one work with
tutor, then phase 2 in
classroom.
Positive
working
relationship
between students and
tutors.
Extensive
professional
knowledge of literacy
coordinator
Team of teachers from different
KLAs trained in Making a
Difference.
Home school links –
diary, interviews with
parents
Timetabling and room
allocation
supports
withdrawal program.
Positive
environment;
easy access to resources
Modelled
Reading
Literacy improvement a
charter priority
Full support of principal,
assistant principal and
curriculum coordinator
Consistent commitment
to the implementation of
the
program,
and
recognition that a single
approach can not be a
panacea.
Experienced
coordinator.
Teachers aware of program
requirements
and
student
abilities;
staff
professional
development.
Strategy offers a model for KLAs
other than English.
Consultation with
maths teacher
staff,
eg
Modelled Reading pairings used
in other class activities
literacy
Texts for Making a
Difference
sessions
selected according to
students’ interests.
Regular structured time
on reading – 20 minutes,
4 days week, 15 weeks.
Ongoing evaluation and
flexibility to modify
aspects of the program.
Cooperative
supportive
environment.
and
working
Program directly linked
to curriculum, included
in assessment.
Reading
materials
suitable to ability and
interest range , includes
newspapers
reading
from home, and course
content materials
Bridging
the
Gap and 60%
of time with
home teacher
Working closely
other teachers.
with
Timetabling arrangement
to facilitate needs of
program
Use of class books in Bridging the
Gap sessions – provided
reinforcement.
One to one – relationship,
self
esteem,
close
communication
Integration of subjects
Diagnostic – could adapt
program for students
Time – continuity from not
stopping at the end of period,
and flexibility in use of learning
time
Security
in
teacherstudent relationship
Better understanding of
students’
needs,
51
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
flexibility to suit specific
needs of students
Focus
of
literacy
program
The
mainstream
English
program,
incorporating
strategies from
the first and
second stages
of
the
Spalding
program.
Additional
support
provided in a
small
group
setting by the
class English
teacher.
Intensive inclass support
in English and
SOSE taught
by the same
teacher.
After
school
program
provides extra
learning time
for students.
Whole school
Literacy in all KLAs
Clear
support
and
understanding
of
program by the school
leadership team.
Language-based
whole class teaching.
School
informed
program.
community
about
the
Individual support
program;
Literacy strategies embedded in
English program.
Regular
monitoring
and
feedback on aspects of literacy
for all students.
Systematic professional
development
for
teachers.
Small group and whole
class with same teacher –
creates extra time for
students
Further opportunities for
extra support if observed
need.
Common language when
talking about literacy
Well-defined role
literacy coordinator.
Initial diagnostic testing,
continual monitoring of
progress of students
needing
additional
support..
for
Support from whole
school leadership team,
including the timetabler.
Home
links:
homework
program; class teacher maintains
regular contact with parents.
All students undertake
mainstream CSF English
and SOSE programs.
Commitment of school
resources,
including
trained teaching aides,
dedicated teaching space
and adjacent office.
Extended learning time with one
teaching team by combining
SOSE and English and linking
with after school program.
Intensive focus on skills
at start of year – students
experience success.
Liaison
with
feeder
primary
schools;
identification of students
likely to need additional
support at the end of
Grade 6.
Parent volunteers work
in classroom.
Positive
relationships
teacher-student
Organisational skills fostered
Mathematics teacher
after school program.
attends
In class support available
to individual students at
all times.
Students encouraged to
be
responsible
for
organising their work.
Constant monitoring of
work,
and
prompt
feedback on finished
work.
52
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
Cooperative
learning
strategies and
First
Steps
strategies
in
mainstream
program.
Program and strategies
inclusive of all students
Cooperative learning groups
relevant to all learning areas.
A mainstream program.
Close
observation
and
monitoring of groups and
working relationships within
groups.
Teacher
undertaking
professional
development during the
year.
First Steps strategies applicable
across KLAs.
Skills are embedded in engaging
context.
Weaker students kept in
mainstream,
closely
monitored
and
supported.
Peer
support
from
cooperative groups.
Class organisation allows
teacher
to
provide
individual assistance as
needed.
Many opportunities for writing,
and for reading silently and
aloud.
Contact with parents
Includes focus on social and
organisational skills.
Year 7 English
program
includes
Spalding
methods..
Literacy focus linked to
mainstream program.
Continuity
program.
in
Spalding strategies used
in context.
Literacy
demonstrated
Open Night.
Emphasis on handwriting and
presentation.
Lots of reinforcement
and repetition helps the
slower
learners
consolidate.
strategies
during
and
structure
Systematic knowledge about
language and how it works.
Extra time with small
group of students.
In each case, the schools were implementing a balanced and connected set of literacy
programs, involving whole school policies and practices, class practices, and support
for individual students. The combination of these aspects represents the common
ground amongst these schools where the students’ achievement was better than
might have been expected.
In addition to the investigation of the two DART assessments in the light of a range
of variables, the DART reports provided all project schools with detailed
information about their students’ progress and achievement over the course of a full
school year. This information could be made available as required to parents,
teachers, and other school personnel. It could also provide a basis for reviewing the
school’s literacy programs and their implementation.
53
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
8. TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES: THE LOGBOOKS
I believe each student’s attitude towards reading has improved since the start of the year and
there appears to be considerable anecdotal evidence suggesting an improvement in the quality
of the students’ work.
8.1 Range of perspectives presented in the logbooks
The logbook was designed as a working document, in which teachers could record
observations and reflections in relation to the implementation of literacy
intervention program/strategies. The notes, observations and reflections recorded in
the logbooks were a valuable source of information about the programs and
strategies being investigated. Through the logbooks it was possible to see how the
program evolved, and was adapted during the year. This strand of data was drawn
on extensively in the project.
The logbooks provide detailed information about the day to day issues of working
with students. Many include observed evidence of development and improvement
for different students over time. There is also detail of some of the practicalities of
implementing the program or strategy.
The first teacher logbook was distributed to all schools in February, and the second
at the beginning of Term 3, in July.
The logbook was in four parts, designed so that teachers could record notes on
implementing the program, on the students involved, and at the end of a term. Some
prompts were provided, such as the following questions in relation to individual
students:
What changes did you observe in the students as the program progressed?
What have been the highlights of the students’ participation in the
intervention program or strategies?
Have other teachers made comments about any of the students? If so, what
did they say?
Has there been feedback from parents?
Have any of the students said interesting things about their attitudes to the
intervention program in conversation with you?
Have you observed any changes or patterns in students’ attendance?
What main problems have the students encountered?
What action will you take next term/semester, in regard to particular
students?
Some teachers used the logbook as a journal, including frequent, regular and dated
entries. Others used it to summarise what had occurred over a period of time,
54
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
especially with students who had been identified as needing additional support,
while others wrote quite brief notes.
The following extracts indicate the range of perspectives presented in the logbooks:
Implementing the literacy program
We have taken real care to ensure that the students in our two ‘intervention English’
classes don’t feel in any way different or extraordinary.
Students appear to improve their reading skills far more rapidly than writing skills.
Constant repetition is a significant aspect of the program. We could see how students
were feeling really much more confident and self-assured after several sessions.
Continued borrowing of short novels used in the program.
The tiredness of some students can be an issue – their energy deteriorates towards the
end of the week – sometimes towards the end of a session.
Keeping up with class work (teachers made allowance for this, but students sometimes
needed extra confirmation of this).
Notes on the students’ experiences
Students would see achieving 100% accuracy on a running record as a highlight. I
would too, but only if maintained when reading the Year 8 prescribed text.
Paul has become far more positive since beginning in the Reading program. He
proudly handed in his English homework early – after working through it with a
parent reading helper. He has been more willing to talk about his work; to be helped; to
have a go.
In the next semester we will concentrate more on writing and spelling as Aaron
usually reads reasonably well and comprehends what he is reading.
One student who missed eight weeks straight last year has been regular in his
attendance, up until the last couple of weeks.
End of term summary
These summaries were evaluative, and helped to identify strengths and weaknesses
of the various approaches.
I am confident that every student I have taken has improved their reading ability and
have at least improved in confidence as they tackle their class work requirements.
Least useful aspects: predictability, boredom for some students; repetitious nature;
rigid.
55
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
Least useful: difficult to find volunteers; hard to timetable (to suit volunteer and
student); sometimes unexpected events, eg excursions etc.
Most useful aspects: the one-to-one interaction – often a student only experiences oneon-one if they are being disciplined - this is much more positive!
Skills learnt in this program (Bridging the Gap) are readily transferable to the reading
and writing that students do in all KLAs. As well this, I have given the entire staff PD
on the strategies used and ways in which they may support these students in
mainstream classes.
8.2 Reflections on programs and strategies
The ongoing descriptions, reflections and evaluative comments in the logbooks
highlights the complexity of literacy intervention and support. The needs and
responses of individual students, the context of the whole school environment, and
the experiences of teachers all influence the enactment of a program or strategy.
The following sequence of notes comes from the logbook of one teacher who used
the logbook as a journal, writing dated entries throughout the year. The notes
capture the realities of day-to-day classroom activity, and offer insights into the
complexities of systematic attempts to improve literacy learning. This teacher had a
twin focus: introducing cooperative learning approaches to her class, and using
strategies from First Steps.
16/3/99 This was one of our best lessons yet. In terms of class structure, no one asked
if they had to work in groups; furniture was simply reorganised. They used 1 st Steps
strategy – a table (who, what, when, where, why) to summarise both a film and as
short story which they read together in groups). It was interesting to hear laughter as
they read through the story and spirited discussion about ‘facts’ to be placed on the
table.
31/3/99 There was a whole group brainstorm on words and phrases beginning with
the letter x, followed by group discussions about ways of writing on these topics. This
lead to some very productive individual writing of stories and articles.
End of term 1. I’ve found it particularly useful to keep students with weaker literacy
skills in the mainstream class for English. Many strategies have proved useful for all
students. These have included:
 using tables to organise information from a story or film;
 discussing ideas for writing;
 reading comprehension questions prior to reading texts;
 watching a video recording in addition to reading a text;
 working with other students on tasks.
Generally, the group arrangement facilitates order in the classroom, particularly
when students are working on a particular task. This allows me to move for group to
group offering more individualised attention and instruction.
56
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
The most difficult aspect has been to maintain a positive atmosphere within some of
the groups. I feel as though there’s a need to work on some groups away from the
whole class, but time-tabling does not permit this.
Because this is a mainstream program, it can certainly be transferred to other
curriculum areas. Class organisation could occur in almost all classes and aspect of
the First Steps program, strategies, etc that have been introduced have far-reaching
consequences for being used in all areas where reading and writing occurs.
14/5/99 I’m frustrated! Students seem so slow to get started on tasks. They don’t ask
questions during instruction, but then say they can’t do it or don’t know what to do
when work is under way. Many are not completing homework. (A number of other
teachers have found the same problems). I’m asking myself if it’s my method of
instruction (task we did was to investigate uses and rules of paragraphs). Perhaps
handing out worksheets would be better/easier (but homework sheets indicate many
students attempt exercises without reading instructions).
26/6/99 Towards the end of semester, the student to have made the most noticeable
improvement has been D. I could pinpoint the time of change to 1/6/99 when I gave
him the opportunity to reorganise his locker. B provided enormous support then in
the manner of reorganising and with positive comments throughout the next week or
so. He constantly reminded D that he needed to earn positive comments and avoid
negatives. From that time on, D completed homework regularly, submitted overdue
work, resubmitted a piece that was unsatisfactory. He smiled and worked
cooperatively with his group and the class. (other teachers have commented that this
has been evident in other classes as well). The improvement has been mostly
behavioural, but because work is now being done I can now concentrate more on
assisting him with punctuation, spelling and sentence structure, areas much in need
of improvement.
57
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
9. THE STUDENT CASE STUDIES
M was non-committal at the start of the program. By the end, he brought a friend along to
the last session to introduce him to his tutor and to ask if he could do the program next.
T on a number of occasions said that he was ‘reading better’. On another occasion he said
that now he didn’t mind reading aloud in class. He said he didn’t mind making a mistake and
having another go.
9.1 The framework for the case studies
These were conducted during Term 3. One student was selected from each of 10
schools, in consultation with the teachers at those schools. The main purpose of the
case studies is to obtain fine-grained information about the students’ experiences in
the literacy programs.
A flexible but common framework was adopted, including:
 observing the student for part of one school day, in normal classes and in
intervention situations;
 talking with the student’s parents;
 reading the student’s work – current workbooks in all KLAs, portfolios of
writing etc;
 review of information such as attendance records, records of testing and advice
from external agencies, regular school reports;
 a conversation with the student;
 discussion with key teachers currently teaching the student.
Parents were approached by the school for permission for their child to be included
in the case studies.
The case studies were based on:
 an interview with the student,
 observations of the student in classes, including the intervention program
 discussions with some of the student’s teachers,
 the review of a sample of the student’s normal classroom work,
 if possible, an interview with the parent/s.
The focus of each case study was on the literacy needs of the student; the
appropriateness of the intervention program to meet these needs; the student’s
response to the intervention program; and the perceived benefits to the student from
varying perspectives. The DART assessments, and the background questionnaires
for each student were reviewed before the visit to the schools, and the relevant
teacher logbooks were also scanned.
58
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
Prior to the school visit, the interviewers reviewed information about the
intervention programs; the students’ DART assessments from Term 1; the completed
background questionnaires; and the teacher logbooks kept during first semester.
All interviews were taped, and the tapes transcribed. The case studies were then
written up from the transcripts, in most cases using excerpts from the interviews.
9.2 Trends in the Case Studies
Several trends are apparent across the case studies. Of particular interest is the
frequency with which there is reference to the students’ improved self-esteem and
confidence. The case studies provide a varied range of evidence of improved literacy
learning outcomes, both within particular programs, and in the mainstream
curriculum. The case studies also provided access to parents’ perspectives on the
literacy support their child was receiving.
Increases in self-esteem and confidence
Considerable emphasis was placed on perceived increases in self-esteem and
confidence linked to participation in the intervention programs. This was described,
for example, as a willingness to take risks, to go back to class and ask questions.
Positive relationships between tutors and students were reported.
Evidence of improved literacy learning outcomes
Evidence of improved literacy learning outcomes was described in various ways:
 reading more
 reading more fluently
 reading more difficult texts
 increased comprehension
 making fewer mistakes when reading aloud
 more accurate spelling
 using spelling strategies, such as breaking into syllables
 answering questions in class
 reading directions and attempting tasks before asking for help
 understanding and using a wider vocabulary
 increased understanding of reading purposes, eg, reading for information
 clearer, neater writing
 reading everyday texts at home
 taking pride in work
 improved attitudes to work
Evidence of improved learning outcomes in mainstream curriculum
The transfer of improved literacy learning outcomes to the mainstream is of
particular interest in this study. Interviews with the student’s teachers, other than
59
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
the literacy tutors or teachers indicated some evidence of improvement, for example
appearing more confident about tackling work, or answering questions in class.
Parents’ viewpoints
All parents interviewed expressed highly positive responses to the intervention
programs and support. Their comments included:
 the value of the one-to-one support
 their child’s increased self-esteem and confidence
 the effective relationship with the tutor/teacher
 evidence of increased confidence with literacy at home
 evidence of students doing more reading
 their child’s enjoyment of the program.
The case studies provide evidence of a range of improved literacy skills and
attitudes.
9.3 Evidence of development
The interview transcripts indicate the variety of ways in which students’
development was observed and understood, and the different sources of
information on the student’s performance, and the impact of the literacy program.
The following comments from two students indicate how they see their
development in reading aloud and spelling. It is interesting to note that these aspects
of literacy receive significant emphasis in most of the programs designed to offer
additional support to students with low literacy achievement.
Reading aloud
B
Reading aloud is easier. I never used to like reading out aloud.
I
Why?
B
It's just scary. I still don't like reading out aloud in front of people.
I
Do you find it easier than it used to be to read to yourself?
B
Yes, when I was reading in my head, I used to just, if I couldn't read a word
I'd look at it and I wouldn't move on and I wouldn't try and sound it out. I'd
just look at it. I couldn't work it out in my head. [now] I can work it out.
I
So what do you think has been the most helpful for you?
B
Reading. And reading out aloud. I never used to read out aloud to anybody.
Never used to show anybody my work.
Spelling
I
B
I
B
Have you noticed an improvement with [spelling]? Was it harder at the start
of the year?
Yeah
What's helped you with that?
Breaking up the words. Knowing how to break up the words and doing
syllable things. Spelling lots of getting spelling words to learn.
60
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
Comments from case study interviews with parents provide insights into some of
the literacy practices students engage in at home. The observation about the
improvement in taking phone messages seems to be a significant marker of
progress.
Parents’ perspectives: Reading and writing
I
Does she read out loud to you at all?
M
Not from novels that she's reading, but she'll read newspaper bits to me.
That's started too. She will read what's in the newspaper on the front page or
whatever else and she'll read something like, oh look, this happened today
mum and read it out. But she won't read a novel out to me, no.
I
Is there anything else you've noticed?
M
Yeah, her spelling and writing. Simple little things like phone messages. She
used to maybe take a phone number and try to remember the name or
whatever else, whereas now she'll actually take the phone message and
attempt a lot more words
Parents’ perspectives: benefits of one-to-one support
I think it's the one on one. I think that makes a big difference. She does
enjoy it. The one on one makes her feel special. I don't think it
embarrasses her to be going. I think she appreciates the extra help
she's getting because I really do think she wanted to read properly or
clearly or more and understand it, and I know the spelling used to annoy
her.
Parents’ perspectives: home literacy practices
And just round the house like - she likes to cook and now she'll pull out a
recipe book and go ahead and do it. Because she knows 'I can read what that
says so I can go ahead and do it’. I still have problems getting her to
read a novel. I try and encourage it but it's really difficult. But she'll
read a magazine, she love her Dolly magazines. She'll read the newsletter
she brings home from school.
He has a homework program as well, which we sit and do and have a bit of fun. He
brought home a new book last night and did three pages of that. There were a couple
of words he didn't know so he pulled out the dictionary and looked them up. He has
to read a passage and answer questions. He knows now if you can't answer the
questions you need to go back. If you can't answer the question right you obviously
haven't read it properly. I think it's marvellous and I only wish he'd had it earlier.
Before he wouldn't read them [the passages]. He'd jump straight to saying what do
you think it will be. He couldn't read it I guess. It was easier to skip it and yell out
and ask somebody. He still wants some help but he answers it, which is good.
The case studies captured some students’ self-assessments of how the support they
had received had improved their literacy skills.
61
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
Self assessment, Student 1
I was a bit iffy at the start of the year but I've picked up a bit now. I read bits and
pieces, like whatever's on the table - the paper, catalogues and that. I don't sit down
and read a book. I read the booklets that come with the computer games. I read the
hints to see how to get through the hard levels.
Well last year or even at the start of this year if I'd seen that book (class novel) I
would have just thrown it away. It was too hard. Now I just think about it and do it.
What I'm reading is a lot harder but I find it easier.
If I come across something hard I'll try and read it and try and work it out and then
I'll ask someone. At the start of the year I'd just sit there and just say tell me the
answer.
Self assessment, Student 2
And in English I can spell words that I've never heard of before, and long words I
can spell. By breaking them up into syllables, and getting some help. If you're
writing a story and you don't know how to spell something you can go and ask or
you can break it up into syllables and try first.
Self assessment, student 3
KA
I got used to sounding out the words. Then it all made sense to me and I
started reading. My spelling was improving, too.
I
Has that helped with your writing?
KA
Yeah, I look for mistakes.
I
So when you write something how do you know that it's wrong?
KA
when you're trying to spell and you write something down, you look at it
first and then you write it again and see if it, like, it makes a difference. Like
look, cover, write, check.
Changed attitudes: confidence and self-esteem
The case studies highlight the recognition of increased confidence and self-esteem
associated with the support students received from the various literacy programs
and strategies.
Well, probably the biggest change I see in her is her self-confidence and being able to
express herself and also her confidence in taking chances with her writing. She
doesn't get everything right, but certainly she uses words and really tries to get them
correct. You would have noticed she takes criticism very well.
Definitely a difference because she wouldn't have even tried it in the beginning of the
year. Because you can see she's a student who could be very easily overlooked. She's
quiet and blends in. So I think they're the main things. Even though I wasn't asking
her, every question I asked she was answering. What's the next word? It was just
this little voice. Very quiet but there.
(Literacy teacher; whole class program)
62
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
The main gains that they have made in the program are in self esteem, I think, and
confidence, a willingness to take risks, go back to class and ask questions. But their
reading, from what I've observed in here, has certainly improved.
(Teacher, small group intensive program)
I
R
I
R
I
R
I
R
Do you think your reading has improved this term?
I used to read slow and now I read fast.
Does going to Corrective Reading help you with your reading in
English classes?
Yes because I read faster.
How do you feel about going to corrective reading sessions?
Sometimes I like it and sometimes I don't.
Why?
Because sometimes I miss good classes like English.
I
F
I
F
I
F
What makes a person a good reader?
They can read.
Imagine someone who's a better reader than you - what makes them better?
They read more.
Finish this sentence. “I'm a better reader because I can …”
Sound out the letters and stuff like that
Teaches’perspectives: improvement
She's reading quite fluently. She can come in and not make a mistake during
running record. She can write a couple of sentences and not make a mistake so she
has times when she's doing really well. Probably the longer the response the more
mistakes start to happen but she can nearly always tell me what she's done wrong, so
I think she's learning re-reading strategies. The one on one is a really big thing for a
lot of these kids, especially because they're not used to experiencing success. And
because it's very positive. All the way through you're going 'well done, well done’.
It's automatic.
I think also they get more knowledge about reading. I don't think many of them have
ever really understood what reading is for - that it's for information. When they had
to fill in those green forms, when it came to the question, "how many times do you
read for information?", some of their reactions initially were 'maybe once a month'.
When you say to them 'when you read at school, or when you read that sign there,
what are you doing? they'll go 'Oh, reading for information!' Because you're
formalising it and saying, 'This is what reading is', it just sort of clicks with them
they're getting fluency and they're getting pleasure.
In reading I'd say just looking at the words. She got the words wrong a lot of the
time. She'd put the familiar words in their place. And I think her slowness. She read
too slowly. Apart from that I don't think she was too bad. She was fairly good at
understanding. But only basic things that are pretty obvious. If you go further in
depth she doesn't really understand much beyond basic questions.
63
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
64
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
10. SUMMER SCHOOLS
The insights and skills I have gained since undertaking the course have been invaluable in my
classroom. I have been able to share the insights with members of my team ….
Two summer school programs providing professional development for university
accreditation focused on literacy interventions, and were observed as part of the
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project. One took place at Monash University
over three weeks for four hours per day in January; the Deakin program was spaced
over three weekends between February and April. Both programs drew on research
and experience in the field of special education, thus adding an additional
perspective to the investigation of literacy intervention programs.
Both courses used the same set of readings: The Learning Disabilities Handbook, Des
Pickering with Marina Leggatt; and The Reading Disabilities Handbook, by Des
Pickering and Marina Leggatt. Both programs focused on diagnosis of literacy
learning difficulties, on using a number of assessment instruments, and on strategies
for improving literacy learning.
10.1 The Monash Summer School
The participating teachers attended the Early Interventions – Literacy Summer School
for four hours per day over three weeks. Students, selected from parents’ and
schools’ responses to advertisements, attended for 1.5 hours within this four hours,
working intensively one-to-one on a program designed by the teacher on the basis of
their learning in the course. Advice on the nature and scope of the intervention was
available constantly from the lecturers and the other participants. The DART
Reading assessments were used with the students.
Monash Summer School DART assessments
 DART Form A for reading was used on the day before the Monash Summer
School commenced in January and Form B for reading was used on the day after
the Summer School concluded.
 Individual student reports were prepared, showing each student’s achievement
on both assessments reported on a single scale.
Summary reports of the whole group’s performance were prepared. The mean result
for both assessments was almost exactly the same. There was no change in the
average performance on the two assessments, taking into consideration the
increased difficulty of Form B. This however does not imply that individual students
did not perform differently. The analysis shows that some students’ performance
improved on the second assessment, some showed little change, and the
performance of some students on the second assessment was lower than on the first.
This finding should be considered in the overall context of the program – daily one
65
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
and half hour sessions for individual students with a tutor over a three week period.
Other evidence, such as parent’s comments and reports from the teacher-tutors
noted improvements in motivation and confidence.
Participants identified a number of reasons for undertaking the course in connection
with their work with students with literacy difficulties:
 need for knowledge about working with students with literacy difficulties
 understanding causes and effective ways of helping students with literacy
problems
 frustration at being unable to help students with learning difficulties in
mainstream classes
 interest in strategies for modifying classroom programs
 improved diagnostic knowledge
 opportunity to carry out screening tasks, and practice in using instruments such
as the Neale Analysis, Ravens, and Peabody.
Some participants identified a need for knowledge and skills to inform leadership
roles within the school:
 ideas and strategies to use, as curriculum coordinator, to provide support for
teachers; developing knowledge and skills to be a resource for other teachers
 being able to give better advice to parents of students with difficulties.
In a questionnaire completed at the end of the Summer School, participants were
asked to comment on the perceived benefits to students of the daily one and half
hour tuition. The following aspects were identified:















the one-to-one relationship
individual focused learning
positive successful experience
sympathetic intensive learning
improved self esteem
increased confidence
provision of strategies student can verbalise and use
targeted approaches
student found that work on syllabification, learning to break down words
assisted with reading
improved comprehension skills and extended vocabulary
organisational skills
positive feedback and encouragement
achieving set goals routine of completing regular homework
completed some of best pieces of writing ever
improved reading accuracy and fluency
These benefits were consistent with benefits reported by the 44 project schools. It is
interesting to note the identification of increased self-esteem, and confidence, and
the value of the individualised learning strategies.
66
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
10.2. Deakin Literacy Professional Development Program.
This was a professional development program. Students were not directly involved
in the program; however, participants undertook a case study of a student in their
own school.
At the end of the program teachers reported that they had gained many insights into
literacy learning and teaching – “understand causes of reading difficulties – therefore
some hope for improvement”;
The approaches and strategies presented in the course were seen be useful in a
variety of ways: “I would use many of them in my English classes”; “Organise PD for
other staff so that strategies can be used across the whole curriculum”; “Guided reading,
readability assessments. Modification of work all useful in planning and delivery of lessons
that maximise opportunities for success”.
The benefits of the case study component of the course for teachers were
acknowledged by all: “given me a greater insight into the complexity of the difficulties
experienced by the selected students and my responsibility as a classroom teacher to adopt
appropriate strategies”. Further, the benefits of the case study for students were also
recognised: “starting to experience success”; “… now responding more positively to his
work”; “individual attention – builds on primary school experience”; “has resulted in a
program being established to assist the particular student”.
As with the Monash summer school, these evaluative comments are consistent with
the reported gains amongst students in the 44 project schools,
67
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
11.
SUCCESSFUL
INTERVENTIONS:
MAIN
FINDINGS,
RECOMMENDATIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH
One of the things I have really enjoyed about using this approach is how talking with the
students about what they learn and how they learn it opens up new opportunities for
engagement.
11.1 Main Findings
In general, the range of achievement in reading and writing of students whose
achievement was low on the first DART assessment showed improvement.
However, the achievements in reading and writing of students who achieved higher
levels in the first DART assessment did not change significantly.
Several schools showed better than expected student performance. It was possible to
identify broad features of the programs and combinations of programs in these
schools, which tallied with the observations and reports in the qualitative data.
11.1.1 Whole school policies and practices
The whole school policies and practices that supported successful interventions
included:

the identification, early in Year 7, of students with low levels of literacy
achievement using transition information from primary schools, testing and
teacher observation and judgement;

targeting and monitoring individual students identified as requiring literacy
support;

for individual students, providing, in appropriate contexts, support which
explicitly addresses their particular literacy learning needs;

explicit and on-going professional development providing knowledge of literacy
and language development and a broad repertoire of literacy teaching strategies
for teachers in all key learning areas;

leadership, professional support and coordination provided by a school literacy
coordinator with significant experience and knowledge of literacy education;

staffing and organisational structures and timetabling which allow for flexible
and varied groupings of students.
68
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
11.1.2 Classroom practices and strategies in all key learning areas
Classroom practices and policies which effectively supported students’ literacy
learning included:












sustained teaching of the full range of reading and writing skills specified in the
English Curriculum and Standards Framework;
explicit teaching of the curriculum literacies of each key learning area;
providing support, in appropriate contexts, to individual students through
programs and strategies which address their particular literacy learning needs;
using classroom practices inclusive of all students;
providing opportunities for students to receive one-to-one support from teachers
and teaching aides in the classroom context;
providing reading materials and purposeful writing activities which engage
students’ interests;
providing regular, planned opportunities for students to engage in sustained
reading and writing activities, in a variety of contexts;
regular and detailed monitoring of students’ progress in literacy, using a variety
of observation and assessment strategies, and the provision of regular and
frequent feedback to students;
establishing and maintaining clear lines of communication between all key
learning area teachers of each class at the year level;
using information communication technologies to provide students with fresh
opportunities to develop and demonstrate literacy skills;
acknowledging and responding to diversity of interests and literacy practices
which engage students at home and in other settings beyond the school;
giving students opportunities to work in a variety of whole class and small
group settings, in teaching spaces appropriate to the activities.
11.1.3 Policies and practices for specific interventions
Students with particular literacy learning difficulties benefited from intensive and
focused teaching and support provided through specific interventions on a short or
longer term basis. Key features of those interventions which enabled students to
improve their achievement levels in literacy included:



69
identifying the specific literacy learning needs of students with low levels of
literacy achievement, and drawing on a wide repertoire of teaching strategies to
provide support matched specifically to those needs;
providing structured, sequenced sessions in one to one or small group settings
which give students regular opportunities over time to work on specific literacy
needs;
maximising opportunities, in individual or small group contexts, for students to
practice reading a range of texts silently and aloud, and to write short and
sustained texts;
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project









creating opportunities for students to work regularly and over time with a
teacher or tutor with whom they can establish an effective working relationship;
recognising the importance of fostering confidence and self-esteem for students
with previous experience of low literacy achievement;
assisting students to develop more effective organisational skills;
linking the support provided in out of class settings with the work of the regular
classroom;
acknowledging and celebrating students’ progress in literacy;
constant monitoring of students in intervention programs and in regular classes,
adjusting the intervention program and strategies to target identified needs;
providing intensive support for a short period, or sustained support over a
longer period as required;
where intervention programs involve withdrawal from regular classes, ensuring
that all the teachers of a particular student are aware of the purpose and nature
of the intervention program, and that they are frequently consulted regarding
observed improvements or changes in the quality of the student’s work;
establishing effective links between home and school, and maintaining regular
communication with parents of low achieving students;
Observations and teacher reports indicated that all programs and strategies resulted
in an increase in confidence and self-esteem for those students involved.
A variety of contextual factors influence the capacity of schools to support students
experiencing difficulty in literacy, including funding, timetabling, expertise and
continuity of staffing.
Teacher’s access to professional development relating to knowledge about literacy
learning and the repertoire of teaching strategies for supporting low-achieving
students is generally limited, although the repertoire of approaches in use across the
44 schools was extensive and varied.
Time is required for the implementation of literacy initiatives – schools frequently
report the need for considerable time to allow for familiarisation and adjustment of
the program.
70
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
11.2 Recommendations
A review of all project data available at the end of the year identified five key aspects
relating to improving literacy learning in secondary schools:
1. Linking support for low achieving students to teaching and learning in
all KLAs.
2. Monitoring and collecting evidence of improved literacy learning.
3. Increasing students ‘self-esteem and confidence, and motivation.
4. Changing attitudes and beliefs about responsibility for literacy
learning in secondary schools.
5. Developing teacher knowledge about literacy learning and expanding
teaching repertoires.
These key aspects were tabled for discussion at the end of year meeting of teachers
from all schools involved in the project. The discussion groups at the meeting
confirmed the centrality of these issues. It is therefore recommended that these five
aspects be considered in future planning to enhance literacy learning in secondary
schools.
The following extracts from teacher logbooks, notes from the end of year meeting,
and the case study interviews indicate the scope of these recommendations.
Linking support for low achieving students to teaching and learning in all KLAs.
This comment from a science teacher about one student’s progress indicates some
recognition of the evidence of improvement in science classes linked to her
participation in the intervention.
She’s a lot more confident in what she does in terms of her ability to get on with
things and to offer responses. She’s still not really confident in group
situations but if you… at the start of the year if you went and spoke to her she
was very uncertain about a variety of things …she would hardly ever offer an
opinion – now she’s a lot better. Also her ability to follow written instructions
- I don’t know if she’s just got used to the expectations but she’s very sequential
in her approach.
This student’s tutor reports her emphasis on the transferability of skills learnt in the
program:
71
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
I’m always reminding her that we’re not only doing it in here - that they are
skills that if she’s at home and she’s reading or if she’s in the classroom and
she’s reading she should remember them. I think that she does, whereas with
some of the other students it just goes in one ear and out the other.
But I think if anyone’s going to transfer the skills Felicity will. She’s got the sense to
realise that this is what she’s meant to do now, not to be happy with the first thing
that comes out but to go back and to read it aloud and underline the bits she’s not
sure about, those sort of things.
The end of year discussions noted that sometimes teachers in different key learning
areas may not be aware that students do not understand what they are reading.
Strategies suggested for making links included: flexibility from timetablers and
teachers; planning meetings; team teaching; professional development for all staff on
literacy strategies; and the preparation of resource files with literacy strategies
appropriate for all key learning areas.
Gathering evidence of improved literacy learning
Parents are a key source of information about students’ development, and comments
from parents interviewed in the case studies are indicative of improved literacy
learning:
Her major weakness was her confidence. That’s what’s really changed – her
confidence. Now, instead of looking at something and saying ‘I can’t do this’ now at
least she’ll have a go. She might not get it all perfect the first time but at least she’ll
have a go. She’s at least got the confidence to try and work out what a word is.
And just little things around the house like - she likes to cook and now she’ll pull out a
recipe book and go ahead and do it. Because she knows ‘I can read what that says so I
can go ahead and do it…’ I still have problems getting her to read a novel. I try and
encourage it but it’s really difficult. But she’ll read a magazine, she loves her dolly
magazines. She’ll read the newsletter that she brings home from school. But as far as
actually sitting down and reading a novel, that‘s a bit of a struggle still.
I think probably that’s just her more than the fact that... I think she knows that she
could read one if she really wants to. It’s just a matter of trying to encourage her to
do so.
The teacher logbooks and the end of year discussions highlighted the wide range of
strategies teachers use to monitor improvements in literacy learning. These include a
range of tests such as the TORCH test, CSF levels, portfolios, in class comprehension,
spelling and cloze test, teacher observations, surveys of parents, students and
literacy tutors. These strategies are used in varying combinations in different
schools. The use of progress maps, such as the DART reading and writing scales, by
72
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
teachers in all learning areas, has potential value for increasing awareness of growth
in literacy in secondary schools.
Increasing self-esteem and confidence; motivation
Tutors, classroom teachers, parents and students all report on increased confidence
and self-esteem as an identifiable outcome of students’ involvement in intervention
programs:
Well probably the biggest change that I see in her is her self-confidence and being able
to express herself and also her confidence in taking chances with her writing. She
doesn't get everything right, but certainly she uses words and really tries to get them
correct. You would have noticed she takes criticism very well.
This confidence can also be seen in self-assessments offered by students in the
interviews, for example:

I was a bit iffy at the start of the year but I’ve picked up a bit now. I read bits
and pieces, like whatever’s on the table – the paper, catalogues and that. I don’t sit
down and read a book. I read the booklets that come with the computer games. I read
the hints to see how to get through the hard levels.

Well last year or even at the start of this year if I’d seen that book (the class
novel) I would have just thrown it away. It was too hard. Now I just think about it
and I do it. What I’m reading is a lot harder but I find it easier.
 If I come across something hard I’ll try and read it and try and work it out and
then I’ll ask someone. At the start of the year I’d just sit there and just say tell me
the answer.
Participants in the end of year project meeting noted the complexity of issues
involved in building self-esteem and confidence. For example, the positive
relationships established with tutors and teachers in one to one support helps
students to participate more effectively in class, but there are also difficulties
associated with withdrawal from class, such as missing out on class activities in
various learning areas.
Key factors noted included:
 building strong teacher-student relationships in secondary schools, using
approaches such as having the same teacher take a class for two subjects;
 selecting texts in all learning areas which are accessible and engaging for
students;
 the importance of literacy and numeracy being whole school issues;
 increasing the engagement and security for students in Year 7;
 the need for support from the school administration for teachers with
responsibility for literacy.
73
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
Changing attitudes and beliefs about responsibility for literacy learning in
secondary schools
The case studies provide some insights into teachers’ perspectives on literacy in
KLAs other than English. One science teacher responded to the interviewer’s
question about the importance of literacy in science:
Sc T: Extremely important especially… not so much with this student but you’ll
get some of those boys… and their behaviour is dictated by their inability to work
with instructions, especially written ones. So I try and be as verbal as I possibly can.
That helps them along a bit. Plus using illustrations and those sorts of things so they
start to identify the meaning of words. So I see it as being extremely important
At the end of year meeting, the group which focused on this issue noted eight areas
in which work can be done in secondary schools to change attitudes and beliefs
about responsibility for literacy learning:
 leadership roles
 collaborative approaches
 timetabling (flexibility and negotiation)
 teaching ‘curriculum literacies’
 professional learning teams (communication, focus)
 resourcing
 whole school strategies
 sustainability (staffing; documentation and evaluation of programs and
strategies).
Developing teacher knowledge about literacy learning and expanding teaching
repertoires
The need for professional development for all secondary teachers emerged as a
recurring theme in all site visits. For, example, one literacy coordinator
Asked faculty heads if they wanted an introduction to the language of their subjects,
how to teach, for example, an evaluative report in technology. This was agreed to by
all heads, and we planned some one and half hour tutorials on how to teach that
genre, and on building up a taxonomy of language for the KLA…..
When this key aspect was discussed at the end of year meeting, the issues of
leadership support and teacher willingness were identified. For teachers to expand
the repertoire of teaching strategies, awareness of the need to provide for different
abilities, access to funding, and flexible delivery of professional development were
74
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
seen to be necessary. Subject specialisation was seen as a potential barrier to change,
but the knowledge bank of teachers’; experience was seen as a sound basis for
action. Quantifying the extent and nature of literacy difficulties was seen a a useful
stratgey to convince staff of the need for action.
75
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
11.3 Implications for further research
Further research is needed in relation to:
:
 ways of providing professional development in approaches to literacy teaching
for teachers in all KLAs in secondary schools, and in strategies for students
needing additional support;
 the development of programs which provide a clear structure and specific
content for teachers and students;
 the significance of the support of the school administration for all literacy
initiatives;
 the significance of the role of literacy coordinator;
 ways of providing time to change teacher beliefs and understandings in relation
to the importance of explicit attention to literacy in all key learning areas;
 the nature and range of texts used in intervention programs
 ways of acknowledging and utilising the diversity of students’ everyday literacy
practices in classroom teaching programs, and in literacy intervention programs;
 the impact of homework on literacy achievement, focusing on a range of
approaches to homework, and on parent involvement.
76
Successful Interventions Literacy Research Project
REFERENCES
Australian Education Council (1994) English – a curriculum profile for Australian
schools, Curriculum Corporation, Carlton
Department of Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs (1998) Literacy
for All: The Challenge for Australian Schools. Australian Schooling Monograph Series
No. 1, Canberra, AGPS
Forster, M., Mendelovits, J. and Masters, G. (1994) Developmental Assessment Resource
for Teachers. DART English, Australian Council for Educational Research,
Camberwell
Masters, G. and Forster, M. (1997) Mapping Literacy Achievement. Results of the 1996
National School English Literacy Survey, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra
77