1 / 20

The Issue

What is the relationship between pedagogy, student engagement and literacy? Daniel Bayer & Geraldine Castleton. The Issue. OAC is a Category 2 SES . Context. Distance education via virtual classroom. Stage 1 Engagement (first intervention). Middle Years Review

lorna
Download Presentation

The Issue

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. What is the relationship between pedagogy, student engagement and literacy?Daniel Bayer &Geraldine Castleton

  2. The Issue OAC is a Category 2 SES

  3. Context Distance education via virtual classroom

  4. Stage 1 Engagement (first intervention) • Middle Years Review • Integrated, interactive, online units with a student interest focus • Team of teachers • Individual Learning Plans • Differentiated curriculum

  5. Engagement Matrix (ICAN)

  6. Results

  7. Results

  8. Stage 2 Pedagogy (Second intervention) Focus on literacy Few areas of the curriculum have received the level of attention of literacy research. The imperative for this focus comes from the significance of literacy – literacy competence is central to learning, and critical for individual’s success in contemporary society (Clay, 2006; Freebody, 2007; Dugdale & Clark, 2008; Rupley & Rasinski, 2010).

  9. Research Background • Literacy has power to impact on individual’s economic well-being, aspirations, family life, health and civic /cultural engagement (Dugdale & Clark, 2008; Reschly, 2010). • Individuals with well-developed literacy levels reach higher level of educational attainment, achieve better outcomes in the labour market, are more likely to have access to technology, less likely to receive state benefits, more likely to own their own home and be more likely to be involved in democratic processes such as voting (Dugdale & Clark, 2008; Reschly, 2010).

  10. Research Background • OAC was already making changes that impacted on student performance. • My goal was to help shape their work as they moved to a focus on literacy in particular and to assist in ensuring the manageability, relevance and validity of what they had proposed. • This work required a systematic approach that recognised the significance of literacy and of literacy pedagogy in effective planning for maximising student learning.

  11. Research Background • Consistent with literature on leading for literacy in schools (e.g. Castleton et al, 2011; Dole, 2004; Gilrane et al, 2008; Sharratt & Fullan, 2006; Murphy, 2004), OAC adopted the following strategies: • a strong commitment from leadership to support staff, students and parents (carers); • a whole-school approach to literacy planning & teaching that was context-grounded, articulated clear goals and accountability; • a shared vocabulary on literacy planning, teaching and assessment; • a needs-based approach to teacher professional learning; • action research approach with strong emphasis on continuous improvement (reflective practitioner)

  12. Literacy • Literacy Plan R – 12 • Site Improvement Plan • PALLS training • Staff training (Stepping Out, First Steps, Phonics) • Wave 3 – 5 (1-on-1) sessions/week of literacy and • numeracy for students with greatest needs. • Wave 2 - 2 (1-on-1) sessions/week of literacy and • numeracy for students with significant needs.

  13. Action Research Qualitative data • 3 – 9 profile. • Parent, student and teacher questionnaires. • Student Engagement Matrix. • observation and anecdotal comments on the implementation of various strategies. • anecdotal records of student progress and attitudes

  14. Action Research Quantitative Data • student PAT Reading and Spelling. • Individual Learning Plans. • Attendance. • Work return.

  15. Base Line data Engagement

  16. Base Line data Literacy

  17. Intervention Action based on Base Line data • Diagnostic testing ofall incoming year 8 & 9 along with ongoing monitoring to inform practice. • Differentiated curriculum to cater for individual needs and build on individual strengths. • Wave 3 – 5 (1-on-1) sessions/week of literacy and numeracy for students with greatest needs in addition. • Wave 2 - 2 (1-on-1) sessions/week of literacy and numeracy for students with significant needsin addition. • Special Education teacher support for students with Negotiated Education Plans. • Term 4, 2013 further data collection to review the intervention and plan for further action.

  18. Opportunities • Innovations Research Conference an understanding of : • Planning & conducting Quantitative and Qualitative Research • Extraneous variables 2. Professor Geraldine Castleton (critical friend) • Clarified OAC’s Action Research (Intervention) • Confirmed and clarified legitimacy of tools and collection methodology • Guided development of the parent, student and staff surveys • Clarified OAC’s caveats, extraneous variables • Researcher Sarah Quinn (PhD Candidate) • Developing interview questions for parent, students and staff • Conducting and analysing interview data

  19. Challenges • Continual enrolments. • New contract teachers. • Distance.

  20. References Castleton, G., Moss, T. & Milbourne, S. (2011) Challenges in Leading for Literacy in Schools in T.Le, Q. Le & M. Short, Language and Literacy Education in a Challenging World. New York: Nova Science Publishers. Dugdale, G & Clark, C. (2008) Literacy changes lives: An advocacy resource. UK:National Literacy Trust. Freebody, P. (2007) Literacy education in school: Research perspectives from the past, for the future. Australian Education Review: Camberwell, Victoria: Australian Council for Education Research. Gilrane, C., Roberts, M. & Russell, L (2008) Building a community in which everyone teaches, learns and reads: A case study. The Journal of Educational Research, 101(16), 333-349. Murphy, J. (2004) Leadership for literacy: A framework for policy and practice. School Effectiveness & School Improvement, 15(1), 65 – 96. Reschly, A. (2010) Reading and School completion; Critical connections and Matthew Effects. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 26, 67-90. Sharratt, L. & Fullan, M. (2006) Accomplishing district wide reform. Journal of School Leadership, 16,583-595.

More Related