Literacy In Use - Or Is It? The Transition From Primary To Secondary SchoolPam Green, RMIT University, Melbourne Australia IntroductionWhat happens to the literacy demands on students in the move from primary to secondary school? This paper examines the process of transition from the student viewpoint and challenges a number of issues related to the experience. The notion, for instance, that "the set textbook is too difficult for most of our students, so we don't use it" demands re-examination. Similarly, the high incidence of activities that look like writing, such as copying and question/answer tasks, warrants close analysis. Such ideas and activities impact on the way in which students "do school" and in particular the ways in which they put literacy to use. This paper stems from a doctoral study of transition with a focus on the literacy-related demands involved. Transition can be viewed as moving from the known to the unknown (Levin, 1987), or the movement from one position or stage to another. For the purposes of this paper, the term transition refers to the movement of students from the final year of primary school to the first year of secondary school (Year 6 to Year 7 in Victoria). Ten Year 6 students from one primary school in an outer western suburb in Melbourne, Victoria were tracked for two years as they made their ways to their respective secondary schools (5 secondary schools in all). The paper highlights a number of related key issues, presents a case study of a student's journey from primary to secondary school, and critically examines the opportunity for meaningful literacy practice within transition. Literacy Practices For the purposes of this paper 'literacy' will be defined in terms of Street's (1984) shorthand definition of social practices to do with writing and reading. The complexity of the concept of literacy (or literacies) is merely noted at this point due to the constraints of this paper. 1 The research presented focuses on classroom writing and reading practices in the move from primary to secondary school. The literacy practices in which students engage, or the use to which literacy is put, within the context of transition, is central to such research. Decades ago, Lewis (1953) stated, "The only literacy that matters is the literacy that is in use. Potential literacy is empty, a void" (p. 127). While it is important to know how to use literacy, this is insufficient on its own. One must know how to use literacy in "a culturally appropriate manner" (Ferdman, 1990, p. 187). However, merely knowing how to use literacy, even in culturally appropriate ways, is inadequate. Reid (1992) makes the distinction between literate capacities and literate habits, and in so doing further emphasises the importance of putting literacy to use. He states that "merely being able to read and write is nothing unless that potentiality is activated", and uses the term aliteracy to denote "literacy without a context of use" (p. 15). When literacy is not put to use, it is meaningless. The work of Edelsky (1991) focuses on meaningful literacy, and provides a means to view the findings that flow from the research presented in this paper. Edelsky stresses that language is learned by use, rather than by exercises. She proposes three divisions in terms of language use that help clarify what constitutes meaningful literacy. Following the presentation of a case study, Edelsky's framework is used to examine the main findings of the study with respect to whether or not the literacy practices documented constitute meaningful literacy use. The Transition Journey The journey from primary to secondary school is not necessarily a smooth one. Numerous studies from both within Australia and beyond, point to the discontinuity with respect to the curriculum (in terms of organisation, content and learning/ teaching processes), that occurs in the transition from primary to secondary school (Blyth, Simmons & Carlton-Ford, 1983; Canady & Rettig, 1993; Fenzel, 1989; Hargreaves, Earl & Ryan, 1996; McGee, 1989; Power & Cotterell, 1980, 1981; Snow, Barnes, Chandler, Goodman & Hemphill, 1991). Hence, transition is generally seen as problematic, at least in the short term. When examined in terms of the literacy demands involved the problematic nature of transition is further exacerbated (Cairney, Lowe & Sproats, 1994a,b; Green, 1995; Hill, Holmes-Smith & Rowe, 1993). From Starting Emotions To Unfulfilled Expectations Nearing the end of their final year of primary school the students involved in the study were asked to express their expectations of secondary school. One student, who will be referred to as Peter, coined the phrase 'starting emotions' to express all of the expectations, both hopes and fears, that he held for what lay ahead. The term is useful in that it expresses the mix of feelings that the students experienced. Although they worried about the differences from what they had known at secondary school, they welcomed the challenges that secondary school might afford. In general terms the students were concerned about:
The students hoped that secondary school would mean:
With respect to the literacy demands the students anticipated:
The concerns about getting organised, making friends, and how to 'do school' in terms of the peer group, were short lived while worries about treatment by older students were unfounded. On the other hand, the heavy load in terms of homework was a continual source of frustration for the students, as was the need to be provided with opportunity for increased independence. Overall, the academic challenge, which included increased demands with respect to literacy practices, was not forthcoming. Instead, the students' expectations in this regard were largely unfulfilled. An overview of the experiences of one of the students who participated in the study highlights the issue of unfulfilled expectations but also sheds light on the question of literacy use which is the central focus of this paper. Sandra's Story Of Transition The final year of primary school was an enjoyable and successful one for Sandra. Her Year 6 teacher described Sandra's work as 'outstanding' for almost all curriculum areas with respect to achievement and effort. She liked to do well and took her work seriously. Secondary school brought the prospect of "meeting new friends" and "having more hi-tech stuff" (Sandra was very interested in computers) but also concerns about "teachers, homework, [being] picked on, detention". Sandra settled into secondary school with relative ease, and was quick to make friends, despite not knowing anyone except her older sister when starting Year 7. She noted that "making friends" was one of the easy things about secondary school. A major part of her adjustment was that she had made friends with a group of conscientious, out-going girls who were active in curricular and extra-curricular activities. Making The Transition: Expectations Versus Reality However, not everything at secondary school was easy. Sandra wrote that one of the bad things about secondary school was that there was "lots of homework and the work is a bit harder". She commented that some of the work was hard but some was not. When asked to explain which subjects were hard and why, she proceeded to explain that Science was hard because it was boring. She found it boring because "(we) usually write. The teacher just explains all the things and explains it in long ... he's explaining it for nearly the whole session". Thus, Sandra did not find the work difficult, but the tedious nature of the teacher's explanations in class was what she meant by 'hard'. Sandra expressed frustration with the behaviour of some of her classmates. For example, she complained: "Oh, they don't really get on with their work. All the boys in our class ... they are always mucking around and that "if they're being silly ... you can't concentrate". Such disruptive behaviour affected the nature of the work done in class. For instance, Sandra explained how in History when a student called out, the teacher would tell the students to work on their own without help and wrote questions on the blackboard for them to answer. The disruptive behaviour increased the amount of homework set. Unfinished work, of which there was a great deal, became work to be completed as homework. While the disruptive behaviour of some of the students impacted on the work done, so did the teachers' perceptions of the academic abilities of the students. For instance, the Science teacher did not use the set text with the students as he believed that it was too difficult for the students. Similarly, the History teacher stated that she had to set fairly easy work because many students could not handle more difficult work. She said that extra work was available for those who wanted it and that Sandra always wanted to do more. The research journal documents an instance of such extra work: "The teacher said that Sandra was copying some writing and a heading for a display as she had nice handwriting". She seemed bored with school but did not mind doing such work even though much of it seemed to be, as described in the research journal, "busy work which involves mindless copying". Thus, the extra work that Sandra engaged in meant activities such as making displays, colouring posters and drawing, all of which could be seen as undemanding time fillers peripheral to the content or the literacy demands that might otherwise have been extended. The impact of what Martin (1990) terms as childism, or attitudes which deem children incapable of many intellectual activities, is clearly evident. 2 In Year 6 Sandra liked to write, but preferred to write stories rather than factual pieces. In her own words: "I like just writing from me head but I don't really like researching". She spent some time at home writing on her computer just for fun, or writing letters to herself. Her attitude to writing was positive. Sandra's teacher noted that she conferenced well with her peers at school, and that she used the computer for publishing her writing at home. In addition, he commented that she engaged in informal kinds of writing, such as journal writing, at home. Sandra: The Writer Sandra contributed to some of the class books published in Year 6, and published two stories of her own in book form apart from her other writing. Some of her ideas for her stories came from her reading. For instance, the idea for her story The alien mansion came from a book that she had read from the Point series, as well as from a computer game called 'Manic Mansion'. In Year 7 there was opportunity to write stories but according to Sandra this occurred "only sometimes". She explained the procedure "She gives you a sheet right and it's got things you have to do about the story and you have to make up a story with all that". The analysis of Sandra's writing from Year 6 to Year 7 revealed the following:
The analysis of Sandra's writing from Year 6 to 7 reveals a reduction in terms of the range of genres in which she wrote. 4 What is most striking is the reduction in the incidence of factual and fictional writing. Such a decline was the result of an increase in what is termed other types of 'writing'. 5 The substantial increase this category is alarming given that such activities place few demands on students in terms of writing. Sandra's writing analysis, like that of the other students in the study, reveals a high incidence of question/answer activities in both English and History. (Note that for students in which data were collected within Year 7 Science that copying was the most common activity noted in the writing analysis.) Whether or not such activities constitute meaningful literacy use is indeed questionable. Sandra: The Reader In Year 6 Sandra exhibited a passion for reading. She read voraciously both at school and at home. Her teacher noted that Sandra read very widely, and loved to read about cats and animal welfare. According to her father, Sandra read every night at home, consuming magazines, books from school and the local library and books with "pretty covers because that is Sandra all over". She discussed her favourite books with older sister who had also read them. Her Year 6 reading log listed eight books for the second half of the year (she misplaced her earlier list). The books listed reflected her interest in the Point book series of thrillers, which a number of the Year 6 students hungrily consumed. The miscue analysis of a typical class novel and that of a typical factual text revealed a high reliance on graphophonic (sound/symbol) cues, reasonable use of syntactical (grammar/structure) cues, and a serious weakness in terms of semantic (meaning) cues. 6 Sandra's retellings were general, and included few details. Thus, according to the miscue analysis and retellings Sandra was only barely coping with the reading demands placed on her in Year 6. She was, however, a keen reader, who was passionate about her chosen diet of books. Sandra's love of reading continued for the initial part of Year 7. At the end of the first semester she told me that she read a great deal and that "I've always got a book". However, early in second semester, Sandra stopped borrowing books from school. She ceased to use the school library for borrowing books and admitted that: "I don't know what they've got". Instead, Sandra frequented the library to play games and to talk to the librarian, not about books but about "whether you won at the Cup [a horse race] or something". This change in behaviour can be attributed, in part, to the impact of peer pressure. The culture of secondary school, unlike that of primary school, meant that library use for the purpose of reading was definitely "uncool". As Sandra's reading log was incomplete - she only recorded three titles - little can be gleaned from it except that the authors included were ones read in Year 6. By the end of Year 7, Sandra admitted: "I don't really read much more. Like I don't really read as much as I did last year". When asked why she replied: "Sometimes it's homework. Sometimes .... Sometimes I just don't find the time. But if I can't get to sleep I read a book". The class studied two novels for the year, namely, Danny the champion of the world by Roald Dahl (1975), and Unreal by Paul Jennings (1991). Sandra commented that: "Our teacher only reads Roald Dahl and Paul Jennings. That's all she reads us". Thus, Sandra was aware of the limited range of novels that were introduced to the class. Both authors had been read in Year 6. Hence, it is evident that reading ceased to be a top priority with Sandra, and her reading had not been extended to include a broader range of authors. Sandra's miscue analysis and retelling in Year 7 showed that she was not gaining much meaning from the texts that she read. The miscue of the typical Year 7 novel showed an over-reliance on graphophonics, and a serious weakness in using both syntactical and semantic cue systems. Her retelling was very sketchy. With regard to the factual text, the miscue analysis indicated accurate reading, in which all cue systems were used, but the retelling was very limited. Thus, according to the miscue analysis and retellings, Sandra was not coping well with the reading demands of Year 7. This contrasts strongly with the picture of Sandra the reader given by her teachers. For instance, when asked about Sandra's reading, her English teacher saw no problem. The notes in the research journal record the search for reasons to explain such a discrepancy: "Perhaps she is selecting easier [less demanding than those read in Year 6] texts. The issue of different 'standards' between schools comes to mind". Sandra's attitude to reading was less positive, she read fewer texts and less regularly than the year before. The Experience Of Transition For Sandra The move to secondary school occurred without difficulty for Sandra. She expressed her surprise with respect to the work demanded of her. She wrote to me: "Secondary school is very easy for me. Last year I thought it would be hard. I'm the one helping my friends instead of them helping me". Sandra quickly learnt to organise herself to cope with the work that was expected. Despite her participation in a wide number of extra-curricular activities, she coped with the work requirements even if at times, this meant completing homework at the last minute. Sandra was quickly regarded as one of the more competent students. One of her teachers claimed that Sandra was "the ideal student". She won a few competitions, including a prize for her colouring-in of a RIBIT poster. 7 While Sandra was most proud of this, it is a further example of the undemanding nature of the work that was valued in the school. Although Sandra was disappointed by the lack of resources and the dismal buildings and grounds of her secondary school, and was frustrated to be in a noisy class which she said "made it hard to think at times", she generally enjoyed secondary school. She had made new friends and felt secure within her peer group. However, Sandra was not coping with the reading demands on her in Year 7. While she was seen to cope with the writing demands, these were far from challenging. The Experience Of Transition Sandra's journey from primary to secondary school is not untypical of that experienced by the other students in the study. She differs, however, in terms of her general attitude to school. Whereas the other students generally felt negative about secondary school. Sandra did not. Overall, she enjoyed secondary school, although such enjoyment was related more to her social and recreational outlets rather than her experiences within the classroom. The reality of secondary school was not always what the students expected. All of the students arrived at secondary school with the expectation of hard work and of a new challenge but found that this was not forthcoming. The establishment of a friendship group was a vital part of transition for each student. The concern of all students, except one, about the ways in which they should 'do school' to avoid the label of 'dork' or 'nerd', was prominent. The Opportunity To Engage In Meaningful Literacy Practices The literacy demands on students in the first year of secondary school differ from those experienced in the final year of primary school. As much of the writing done in Year 7 consisted of copying, fill-in-the-gap activities, question/ answer activities, listing and/or labelling, the demands on students' writing were greatly reduced from those imposed in Year 6. Such 'writing' led to passivity on the part of the students. There was less opportunity for students to take control of their writing. As a result, most of the students verbalised dissatisfaction and boredom with 'writing', particularly with the amount of copying in which they had to engage. A general decline in positive attitudes to reading, a loss of previously regular reading habits, the lack of library use, as well as reduced reading in terms of numbers and the range of texts both at home and at school is evident for all students. Many questions arise from the study, not the least of which pertains to the opportunity for students to engage in meaningful literacy use. The research is based, in part, on the assumption that literacy practices are meaningful when put to use, not when the motions are gone through without purpose nor when the user lacks the opportunity for control. As noted earlier, Edelsky's (1991) three distinctions pertaining to the meaningful use of language are useful in this analysis. The Opportunity To Engage In Meaningful Writing One of the three distinctions within Edelsky's work is between writing and NOT-writing which depends upon whether or not the writer is constructing meaning. Most of the writing done in Year 6 engaged students in the construction of writing in factual genres and in fictional genres, which often involved drafting and redrafting. In particular, in what was termed 'story writing' time in the Year 6 class, students had the opportunity to engage in writing of their own choice. Such choice usually pertained to topic, genre, format, intended audience, and publication. The students had consecutive time to construct their ideas on paper. Writing that was not completed was left to the following day(s). Although instructions were not made explicit by the teacher at each session, some discussion about an aspect of writing often preceded the writing session. For instance, on one occasion towards the end of the school year, the teacher and students discussed their aspirations about writing prior to beginning their own writing. Time was then available for students to write in ways which were largely of their own choosing. A number of class books were produced in Year 6. These provide further instances of students engaged in constructing meaning. Each student had the opportunity to contribute to such books, which were written with a specific audience in mind. For instance, two of the class books, one about the family and another about grandfathers, were written to be read to the Year Prep class with which the Year 6 students worked for cross-age activities. In addition, a St. Valentine Day class book was written to be shared with the other Year 5/6 class. Contribution to such books, although encouraged by the teacher, was not compulsory. It is evident, therefore, that the writing demands of Year 6 generally involved students in the construction of meaning, and therefore such demands are classed as writing. With respect to the majority of the 'writing' done in Year 7, which included copying, question/answer activities, fill-in-the-gap activities, as well as listing and labelling, little construction of meaning occurred. For instance, when students are engaged in copying, they are not making their own meanings but rather are transposing meanings made by others. Similarly, the writing demands involved in question/answer activities in which the writer regurgitates or reshuffles text do not involve the construction of meaning. For example, such activities are found in the textbook History begins (Coupe & Scanlan, 1986) which was used in Year 7 History at Sandra's secondary school. The activities provide students with some information to read from which a list of questions are to be answered. Most of the questions are literal in that they pertain to information contained directly within the text. Fill-in-the-gap activities, which require the addition of single words to gaps in sentences, require little from the student in terms of writing. The active construction of text does not occur. Furthermore, a lack of context is evident in that such activities do not involve the use of language for a 'real' purpose. Similarly, the activities of listing and labelling do not engage students in the construction of meaning via writing especially when it is considered that often the necessary single words were copied from another source in the classroom. The high prevalence of such activities (under the category of other types of 'writing') show little construction of meaning through writing in Year 7. Thus, most of the 'writing' done in the first year of secondary school can be classified as NOT-writing. The second distinction used by Edelsky is the differentiation between exercise and non-exercise. Exercises are classed as events that are designed for the purposes of instruction or evaluation. Edelsky discusses instruction in terms of the student's purpose being "to comply with an assignment". She explains evaluation in terms of the student's purpose being "to prove competence" (p. 86). The majority of the writing done in Year 6 falls outside these definitions of exercise. Most of the writing in which the students engaged was of their own choosing, and was aimed at an audience that was not limited to the teacher. Thus, such writing was not done to meet the demands of an assignment nor to prove competence, but rather to take the opportunity to write in a way of the student's choosing, and for a self-selected audience. However, there is some evidence of exercises in the Year 6 writing samples. The listing and the labelling tasks that were identified in the writing analysis can be seen as instances of exercises. Such listing occurred in order to comply with a set task that the teacher evaluated. However, such tasks comprised only a minor part of the total writing done in Year 6. Hence, most of the writing done in Year 6 did not fall into the category of exercise. On the other hand, most of the 'writing' done in Year 7 was completed to comply with the demands of an assignment or task set by the teacher. The majority of the 'writing' done consisted of copying, question/answer activities, fill-in-the-gap activities, listing and labelling, and therefore was done to comply with the demands of instruction. In addition, a fairly commonly used activity in English and in History was letter writing. The letters were written to imaginary recipients and were not sent. Instead the teacher read and often graded the letters. Thus, much of the writing done was written for the teacher, who was the main audience, and who often evaluated the writing using a grading system. The third distinction made by Edelsky refers to the social relations involved in a literacy event which position the writer (or reader) as an Object or Subject. If the event is "instigated, ended, shaped, paced, 'topic-alized', assessed and so on by someone other than the reader" or in this immediate context the writer, the event positions the writer as an Object (p. 86). In other words, decisions about the writing, such as genre, topic, and audience, are in the hands of someone other than the writer. As a result, the writer has little, if any, control over the writing. If the writer has the opportunity to control the writing event, the position is one of a Subject. Most of the writing done by the students in Year 6 gave them the opportunity for choice. Such choice pertained to matters such as topic, length, genre, as well as whether or not the piece was published, read to the class, and/or displayed. Thus, the students generally had ownership over their writing, and were positioned as Subjects. Further evidence is found in the production of the class books mentioned previously. Such books were edited and compiled by a group of students from the class. Hence, ownership of class books rested firmly with the students. They had much opportunity to control what was published, and how the writing and publishing was done. In contrast, the 'writing' done in Year 7 mostly positioned students as Objects in that the task was set and evaluated by the teacher. In addition, the scope for choice, such as that which existed in the previous year, was limited. The students had little opportunity for control over their writing. To summarise, the opportunity for students to engage in meaningful writing practices diminished in the move from primary to secondary school. In Year 6 most of the writing was classed as writing, and as non-exercises in terms of Edelsky's distinctions, and students were positioned as Subjects in terms of their writing. Thus, most of the writing demands on students in Year 6 constituted meaningful writing. On the other hand, in Year 7 most of the writing was classed as NOT-writing, and as exercises. Furthermore, students were positioned as Objects and had little control over their 'writing'. Thus, in the first year of secondary school, the students had reduced scope to participate in meaningful writing practices. The Opportunity To Engage In Meaningful Reading As was the case for writing, Edelsky's three distinctions for meaningful literacy use are applied to the findings about reading. The first distinction, which refers to the difference between reading and NOT-reading, is whether or not a text meaning is constructed by the reader. In Year 6 reading by students themselves was a daily activity. Students read a range of texts for themselves and engaged in a number of activities, such as class discussions, in which they demonstrated the meaning that they had constructed from their reading. That students were, for the most part, constructing meaning and thus actually reading, rather than NOT-reading, was also evident in the way in which they used ideas from their reading in their writing. Whether or not students were engaged in reading or NOT-reading is more difficult to ascertain in Year 7. For instance, as much of the reading was set as homework, it is hard to know whether reading by students actually occurred. Together with the high incidence of teacher reading and/or reading around by some students, there was much opportunity for many students to avoid reading. The reduced opportunity open to students in Year 7 to read for themselves meant that there was not a high incidence of reading in which students made their own meaning. However, there was some evidence of reading. For instance, reading the questions within question/answer activities involves some construction of meaning. Similarly, fill-in-the-gap activities require students to engage in some reading. While such examples of reading are not very demanding, they do constitute reading within Edelsky's divisions. Yet, activities such as copying from textbooks are examples of NOT-reading. Students can complete such tasks without constructing meaning as all that is demanded is transposition of text from one place to another. With respect to the distinction between exercise and non-exercise, most of the reading done in Year 6 can be categorised as non-exercise. Much of the reading that occurred by Year 6 students fell under the label of reading for reading's sake or for pleasure. This was an important goal held by the classroom teacher. However, some of the reading done in Year 6 can be seen as exercises. For instance, the reading that occurred, as part of "the Mallee Fowl work" which was part of a follow-up to a camp, can be classed as an exercise in that the purpose was to meet the demands of an assignment. Such exercises constituted only a small part of the reading done, and pertained mainly to the reading of factual texts. However, most of the reading that occurred in Year 6 were non-exercise, as the most common reading done by students was the daily quiet reading time in which they selected their reading and took time out to read for pleasure. With respect to Year 7 most of the reading that occurred can be classed as exercises in that it was done to meet the requirements of an assignment and/or to prove competence or understanding. The opportunity to read for pleasure was provided on a weekly or fortnightly basis. Thus, there was little room for reading for pleasure at school. Instead, the reading of novels, which often were read by the teacher, was followed by an assignment of questions and answers. Such assignments were graded by the teacher and, therefore, engaged the students in reading for the purpose of meeting the demands of the teacher. In History most of the reading that occurred was done so that students could complete question/answer activities. In Science, there was little evidence of reading. As indicated earlier, when texts were used the most commonly used follow-up activity was copying. This involves little if any reading. The social relations involved in the use of literacy refer to the way in which the reader is positioned. When a reader can exert control over a reading event, the reader is positioned as Subject. For the most part, this was the position of Year 6 students when reading. They had much opportunity for choice in their reading in terms of author, titles, and genres. Furthermore, there was room to choose to read in spare time, to decide when to talk about their reading, and to select follow-up activities. Hence, the availability of time has much impact on whether or not such activities can occur. In turn, these activities do much to position the reader as Subject. On occasion, however, the teacher did shape the way in which a reading event occurred, and the students had less control over their reading. Thus, students were then positioned as Objects. However, such occasions did not constitute the majority of the reading practices that occurred in Year 6. In Year 7 reading by students was, for the most part, shaped, paced, and assessed by the teacher. There was limited opportunity for students to instigate or control the reading that did occur in class. For instance, although some choice was offered, teachers largely controlled what was read. Time for reading was restricted to time denoted by the teacher, and the activities pertaining to reading were usually set by the teacher. On occasion, such as in the RIBIT program, there was some choice, but this was usually restricted to a limited number of options. It is evident that the opportunity to engage in meaningful reading practices dwindled as students made the move from primary to secondary school. Most of the reading in Year 6 was categorised as reading, rather than NOT-reading, but the opposite was evidenced for Year 7. Similarly, while most of the reading done in Year 6 was classed as non-exercise, the majority of the reading tasks in Year 7 were categorised as exercise. In Year 6 students were generally positioned as Subjects in terms of their reading. However, in Year 7 the position was mostly that of Object. To summarise, the opportunity for students to engage in meaningful reading practices decreased in the transition from primary to secondary school. Conclusion The diminished opportunity for meaningful literacy practice within the transition from primary to secondary means that the students were exposed to a restricted view of what constitutes meaningful literacy practices associated with writing and reading, and of what such literacy practices can do. As well as having negative repercussions for student attitude to, and habits in, writing and reading, such practices are limiting in terms of the uses to which students learn to put writing and reading at school and beyond. Students were positioned so that they had little, if any, control over the literacy practices in which they engaged. Student expectations of increased demands in terms of writing and of reading were not realised in Year 7. Thus, the opportunity to seize upon the students' enthusiasm for more challenging work was missed. In general pedagogical terms, a shift in focus from the individual student to content matter, and a change in emphasis from catering for the individual student to meeting the needs of a group of students, are evident in the transition from Year 6 to 7. With respect to the literacy demands, a shift in emphasis from process to product can also be seen. The constraints of time, discipline, peer pressure, and minimal teacher expectations have left their mark, and have emerged as vital aspects for further consideration. The complexity of schooling, compounded by that of literacy practices, means that there are no simple solutions to the problems incurred in transition. However, one signpost is obvious - the need for longitudinal case studies - beyond the transition period. This would provide further information upon which educators, at all levels (primary, secondary and tertiary), could act.
Notes: 1. For ease of discussion, the term literacy is used throughout. However, the need for a more encompassing term such as multiliteracies is noted. For elaboration, refer to The New London Group (1996) A Pedagogy of Multiliteracies: Designing Social Futures in Harvard Educational Review. 66(1), 60-92. 2. The term "childism" refers to "a set of rather patronizing and romantic attitudes to children" (Martin, 1990, p. 107). When such attitudes are held by teachers, as was the case for a number of Year 7 teachers involved in this study, teacher expectations of what students are capable of doing are low. This has implications for the literacy demands placed on students. 3. It should be noted that data collection occurred for each student in Year 7 in two subjects, namely English, and Science or History. Complications in terms of access to classes meant that data collection transpired for each student in two of the three nominated subject areas. 4. During the writing analysis each piece of writing for each student was broadly categorised as being factual, fictional or other types of 'writing'. From such categorisation percentages were calculated by considering the total number of samples written by each student and the percentage of such writing that fell into each of the three categories. Elsewhere I have defined a range of eight factual genres. Although the definition of the term recount has been revised slightly, the definitions of my early work are still relevant. The definitions are as follows:
It should also be noted that where a sample of writing contained aspects of more than one genre, or other type of 'writing', the sample was categorised according to the genre (or type) in which most of the writing contained in that piece was written. 5. Throughout the analysis of student writing samples, a category termed other types of 'writing' was established. This category included activities that looked like writing, but were not in that there was little composition or meaningful creation of text. Hence, 'writing' is used to denote such activities, which included copying, question/answer activities, fill-in-the-gap activities, listing, and labelling. Each of these terms is defined below. Copying refers to printed text that is copied from the board or a textbook by the student. As such copying demands no composition on the part of the student. Instead the task is mechanical, the writing having been done by someone else such as the teacher or the author of a textbook. Question/answer activities consist of questions about a text from which answers must be derived. The majority of such questions identified in this study required literal answers. Fill-in-the-gap activities require the completion of missing words. Single words are usually required to be inserted into sentences provided on a work sheet or copied from the board. Listing means writing a list of (usually single) words. Labelling pertains to (usually single) words attached to a diagram, or a map. 6. A miscue analysis and a retelling was conducted at the end of Year 6 and of Year 7. Each student was recorded reading from a fictional text and a factual text that were deemed 'typical' of those used at that time. The teachers involved in the study were consulted for the selection of texts that were 'typical' of those read in the class. The texts used were previously unsighted by the students so that they could not use prior experience of the text to aid their reading. After each text was read, a simple retelling occurred. The reading was then analysed using the process of miscue analysis as outlined by Johnson (1979). The miscue analysis and the retelling provided information about how the students were coping with the reading demands on them at the time. 7. RIBIT refers to Read in Bed, It's Terrific, and denotes a system of reading in which students borrow from a range of novels from six categories. The system, which includes a range of activity sheets that students complete once they have read the selected novel, was used at two out of the five secondary schools involved in the study. References:Blyth, D. A., Simmons, R. G., & Carlton-Ford, S. (1983). The Adjustment of Early Adolescents to School Transitions. Journal of Early Adolescence, 3 (1-2), 105-120. Cairney, T., Lowe, K., & Sproats, E. (1994a). Literacy in transition: An evaluation of literacy practices in upper primary and junior secondary schools (Summary Report No. 1). University of Western Sydney. Cairney, T., Lowe, K., & Sproats, E. (1994b). Literacy in transition: An evaluation of literacy practices in upper primary and junior secondary schools (Research Report No. 2). University of Western Sydney. Canady, R. L., & Rettig, M. D. (1993). Unlocking the Lockstep High School Schedule. Phi Delta Kappan, 75 (4), 310-314. Coupe, S., & Scanlan, B. (1986). History begins. Melbourne: Longman, Cheshire. Dahl, R. (1975). Danny the champion of the world. Middlesex: Puffin Books. Edelsky, C. (1991). Literacy: Some purposeful distinctions. In C. Edelsky (Ed.), With literacy and justice for all: Rethinking the social in language and education (pp. 75-95). London: The Falmer Press. Fenzel, L. M. (1989). An ecological study of changes in student role strains during the transition to middle school. Paper presented at the biennial meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Kansas City: Society for Research in Child Development. Ferdman, B. M. (1990). Literacy and Cultural Identity. Harvard Educational Review, 60(2), 181-204. Green, P. (1992). A matter of fact: Using factual texts in the classroom. Armadale, Melbourne: Eleanor Curtain Publishing. Green, P. (1995) The literacy-related demands involved in the transition from primary to secondary school. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, La Trobe University, Bundoora. Hargreaves, A, Earl. L., & Ryan, J. (1996). Schooling for change: Reinventing education for early adolescents. London: The Falmer Press. Hill, P., Holmes-Smith, P., & Rowe, K. J. (1993). School and teacher effectiveness in Victoria. Carlton: University of Melbourne, Institute of Education. Johnson, B. (1979). Reading appraisal guide. Hawthorn: Australian Council for Educational Research. Jennings, P. (1991). Unreal: Eight surprising stories. Ringwood: Puffin Books. Levin, D. M. (1987). Pathologies of the modern self: Postmodern studies on narcissism, schizophrenia, and depression. New York and London: New York University Press. Lewis, M. M. (1953). The importance of illiteracy. London: George G. Harrap and Co. Ltd. Martin, J. R. (1990). Literacy in science: Learning to handle text as technology. In F. Christie (Ed.), Literacy for a changing world (pp. 79-117). Hawthorn: Australian Council of Educational Research. McGee, C. (1989). Crossing the Divide: Transition from Primary to Secondary School. Set, 1, 1-4. Power, C., & Cotterell, J. (1980). The Problems of Transition From Primary to Secondary School. Set, 1, 1-4. Power, C., & Cotterell, J. (1981). Changes in students in the transition between primary and secondary school (No. 27). Canberra: Education Research and Development Committee. Reid, I. (1992). A literacy imperative: Hasten slowly. In R. Cavalier (Ed.), Australian Language and Literacy Policy: Special Conference of Teacher Training Providers on Literacy (pp. 12-21). Canberra: Department of Employment, Education and Training. Australian Language and Literacy Council. Snow, C. E., Barnes, W. S., Chandler, J., Goodman, I. F., & Hemphill, L. (1991). Unfulfilled expectations: Home and school influences on literacy. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Street, B. V. (1984). Literacy in theory and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. The New London Group (1996) A Pedagogy of Multiliteracies: Designing Social Futures in Harvard Educational Review. 66(1), 60-92. |
|
|
