Alison W. Arrow

Why the New Zealand National Literacy Strategy Has Failed and What Can Be Done about It: Evidence from the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS) 2011 and Reading Recovery Monitoring Reports.

For the past 15 years, the New Zealand government has initiated major efforts to reduce persistently large inequities in achievement outcomes in literacy education, including the development of a national literacy strategy. The aim of this study was to provide an analysis of the factors that have contributed to the failure of this strategy and what can be done to overcome the problem. We began by presenting evidence in support of the claim that the national literacy strategy has failed, drawing on data from the PIRLS 2011 study and the latest annual monitoring report of Reading Recovery (RR) data. We then identified three interrelated factors as contributing to the failure of the national literacy strategy: (1) a constructivist orientation toward literacy education, (2) the failure to respond adequately to differences in literate cultural capital at school entry and (3) restrictive policies regarding the first year of literacy teaching. In the final section of the paper, we reviewed research in support of what we maintain is the most effective strategy for reducing the literacy achievement gap: the use of differentiated instruction from the outset of formal schooling that takes into account interactions between school entry reading-related skills (high versus low literate cultural capital) and method of teaching reading (constructivist versus explicit approaches). We also argued that RR should be replaced with an intervention program that is based on contemporary theory and research on reading and targets those struggling readers who need help the most.

Preservice Teacher Knowledge of Basic Language Constructs in Canada, England, New Zealand, and the USA.

The present study examined preservice teachers’ (PSTs) knowledge of basic language constructs across four different English-speaking teacher preparations programs. A standardized survey was administered to participants from Canada (n = 80), England (n = 55), New Zealand (n = 26), and the USA (n = 118). All participants were enrolled in undergraduate university programs that led to teacher certification for general education in the primary grades. Our data reveal that preservice teachers from all four countries show patterns of relative strength in areas that were targeted to be crucial within their national initiatives. Nevertheless, in general, PSTs demonstrated a lack of knowledge of certain constructs needed to teach early reading skills. The results are discussed in relation to research reports and initiatives regarding beginning reading instruction from each of the four countries.

Literate Cultural Capital and Matthew Effects in Reading Achievement

In addition to a rigidly constructivist orientation towards literacy education (see Chapter 6 of this volume), two other factors appear to have contributed to the failure of New Zealand’s national literacy strategy: the failure to respond adequately to differences in literate cultural capital at school entry and restrictive policies during the first year of literacy teaching. In this chapter, we argue that both factors trigger Matthew effects in reading achievement, which would explain New Zealand’s comparatively high levels of variability in test scores. The restrictive policies during the first year of literacy teaching that contribute to Matthew effects stem from three sources: RR’s “wait-to-fail” approach to reading intervention, misunderstandings regarding Constrained Skills Theory (CST) (Paris, 2005; Paris & Luo, 2010), and misguided views about culturally responsive instruction. The chapter is divided into two sections. The first section focuses on how the failure to respond adequately to differences in literate cultural capital at school entry contributes to Matthew effects in reading. The second section focuses on how restrictive policies during the first year of literacy teaching contribute to Matthew effects.

Teacher Knowledge Needed for Differentiated Early Reading Instruction

Differentiated instruction in reading refers to teachers’ use of research-based assessment procedures and instructional strategies to cater to the differing skill needs of beginning readers (see Chapter 8 of this volume). To provide for effective differentiated instruction, it is important for teachers to have an understanding of how reading and writing develops. Attaining that understanding, however, is frequently a problem.

Meeting the Needs of Beginning Readers through Differentiated Instruction

In Chapter 6 of this volume, Tunmer, Greaney, and Prochnow argued that the rigidly constructivist approach to literacy instruction in New Zealand has been a major contributing factor to the failure of New Zealand’s national literacy strategy and the large variation in literacy scores on international surveys, such as the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS). Prochnow, Tunmer, and Arrow, in Chapter 7 of this volume, extended this argument by showing that the failure to respond adequately to differences in literate cultural capital at school entry triggers Matthew effects in reading, which further helps to explain New Zealand’s comparatively high levels of variability in test scores. In this chapter, we argue for differentiated instruction as an approach that is better suited to overcoming the differences in literate cultural capital at school entry than the current “one-size-fits-all”, rigidly constructivist method.

Partnership in Promoting Literacy: An Exploration of Two Studies in Low-Decile Early Childhood Settings in New Zealand

Reading and writing skills serve as the major avenue for achieving the essential learning areas of the “New Zealand Curriculum” (Ministry of Education, 2007a) and are the foundation for learning in all subjects studied at school. If children do not learn to read, their general knowledge, spelling, writing, and vocabulary development suffer (Stanovich, 2000). The National Early Literacy Panel Report (NELP) (2009) identified some critical understandings that children need to develop in early childhood in order to become literate at school, which include knowledge of the alphabet, phonological awareness (being aware of sounds in words), the ability to rapidly name letters, numbers, objects, and colors, the ability to write their own name and to be able to remember spoken information for a short period of time. In addition, children need to understand print conventions and concepts, have strong oral language and the ability to match and discriminate between visual symbols. It is not surprising then that many countries have looked at what experiences children should have to develop literacy before school entry and the implications for teaching practice (McLachlan & Arrow, 2011).

Teachers’ use of phonics, knowledge of language constructs, and preferred word identification prompts in relation to beginning readers*

Abstract New Zealand’s approach to literacy instruction is predominantly whole language. Explicit code-orientated literacy instruction is not favoured, however, most teachers are believed to include phonics in their literacy lessons. No study has been reported on phonics use in New Zealand schools. Survey responses on the use of phonics instruction from 666 primary school teachers were analysed. We also assessed knowledge of the basic language constructs related to early reading success with 55 teachers participating in a professional development program on literacy teaching. A word identification prompt task based on six common word error scenarios experienced by beginning readers was also administered. Results of the phonics survey revealed that 90% of teachers indicated they used phonics in their literacy instruction. Knowledge of basic language constructs was variable: phonological and phonemic knowledge were generally good, but understanding of phonic and morphological constructs was relatively weak. Only 40% of initial word identification prompts were focussed on word-level information; the remainder (60%) were based on context or were non-specific. The implications of these findings for beginning readers are discussed.

Conceptualising Literacy in the Early Childhood Setting

This chapter will provide a brief introduction to literacy research with children in the early years (birth to 8 years) and will identify some of the pressing issues and concerns in research on early literacy. The theoretical framework which underpins many of the studies is explored, identifying that much research into early literacy has employed socio-pyscho-linguistic, social practice and cultural historical explanations of how children learn. The unifying theme of early multi literacies is explored. An overview of the chapters in the book is provided, along with comment on how each chapter contributes to the growing body of early childhood literacy research.

The Future of Literacy Research in the Early Childhood Context

This chapter concludes the volume and identifies the nature of research methods used, the key themes or commonalities in the research undertaken and any implications for the teaching and learning of literacy in the early childhood setting. In addition, this chapter will explore whether a research agenda for early literacy research can be identified from the chapters and other sources, which may be useful in guiding further research and identifying implications for policy.

Promoting the Predictors of Literacy in Early Childhood Settings: An Analysis of Two Studies in Low SES Settings

Research suggests that professional learning can enhance the effectiveness of teachers’ literacy practices and improve literacy outcomes for children prior to school entry (Cunningham, Perry, Stanovich, & Stanovich 2004, Cunningham, Zibulsky, & Callahan, 2009; Justice, Kaderavek, Fan, Sofka, & Hunt, 2009). Two mixed methods studies (Punch, 2009) presented in this chapter examined the question of whether different approaches to professional learning would lead to improved literacy outcomes in children. Study one asked if a workshop on literacy acquisition would increase teachers’ understandings of literacy in four early childhood centres and enhance children’s literacy outcomes over an 8 week intervention period, with a fifth centre used as a control (McLachlan & Arrow, 2013). Pre- and post-test measures of children’s literacy were collected, along with teachers’ accounts of how they promoted literacy during the intervention period. The second study asked if collaborative planned reviews with kindergarten teachers would enhance literacy outcomes for children. Children’s literacy was assessed at three intervals, using methods trialled in study one. Teachers’ and parents’ views about literacy were also collected, and discussed at regular meetings with the research team. Key findings suggest both models lead to changes in teachers’ practice and children’s literacy outcomes. The implications for effective literacy pedagogies, curriculum and teachers’ professional learning will be explored.