Aus: 'Dud teachers? In Victoria, it's the lack of phonics that's the problem' by Tina Daniel

News articles, interviews, research, events and lots more - ready for your comments.
Post Reply
User avatar
Debbie_Hepplewhite
Posts: 2498
Joined: Sat May 23, 2015 4:42 pm

Aus: 'Dud teachers? In Victoria, it's the lack of phonics that's the problem' by Tina Daniel

Post by Debbie_Hepplewhite »

Researcher Tina Daniel suggests that 'lack of phonics' is the problem of reading instruction - not 'Dud Teachers':
Dud teachers? In Victoria, it's the lack of phonics that's the problem[/quote

https://www.theage.com.au/national/vict ... xTPIHQMkAQ
It is ironic that the Acting Minister for Education, Stuart Robert, should blame “dud teachers” for the decline in student achievement, as he did last week.

In fact, you would struggle to find a topic that dominates the thoughts of primary school teachers more than how well their students are learning to read. Every teacher, whether they work in the public or private sector, knows this foundational skill is critical, not simply for reading itself, but so that students can access the broader curriculum, discover science and history, communicate a project idea, or read a maths problem.
In her piece, Tina also references the Right to Read inquiry by the Ontario Human Rights Commission:
Recently, in Canada, the Right to Read Project and Ontario Human Rights Commission released a report on the issues plaguing the teaching of reading and the inadequacy of prevailing “balanced literacy” practices. The report highlights that when children don’t learn to read adequately at school, their human right to participate in society is violated.
There is also reference to literacy practices often referred to as 'balanced literacy' which are not informed by the vast body of research findings - and at the heart of this problem is long-established literacy programmes which are proving extremely challenging to eradicate from the classroom such as:
These barriers prevented many teachers from shifting their practice to align with the research evidence. As one teacher observed: “We still use Fountas and Pinnell [a literacy company established in 1996 based on the debunked “balanced literacy” approach to learning], but it is not considered best practice for all students. I am frustrated that we … aren’t setting all children up for success.”
You can read a number of threads via the IFERI Forum featuring literacy programmes and training (internationally) that are proving impossible to get out of our schools including for intervention purposes (such as Reading Recovery).

Dr Tina Daniel is a researcher at Deakin University and an affiliate of the Deakin University Centre for Humanitarian Leadership.
User avatar
Debbie_Hepplewhite
Posts: 2498
Joined: Sat May 23, 2015 4:42 pm

Re: Aus: 'Dud teachers? In Victoria, it's the lack of phonics that's the problem' by Tina Daniel

Post by Debbie_Hepplewhite »

I feel the need over and again to point out that this battle over reading instruction methods and content has been going on for, literally, decades - in fact, well over half a century. Rudolf Flesch wrote a book in 1955 exposing the need for phonics - at the time his original book was a best seller:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Why_Johnny_Can%27t_Read

I refer to just some of the amazing 'Giants' in the field - probably unknown or long-forgotten by the latest generation taking on the cause of the 'Science of Reading' - sadly, some of these Giants are now departed showing just how long this ludicrous/outrageous situation continues:

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1172

I am perplexed how some people consider they have written 'the' definitive paper to put the battle to rest - such naivety.

Indeed, one of the contributing inquiries which became (to some) world-renowned was from Australia (2005) - this should have provided the teaching profession in Australia, and teacher-training profession, with the much-needed steer towards quality, systematic phonics provision - see here for these significant international inquiries into reading instruction:

https://iferi.org/evidence/

Yet, despite these inquiries, we do not have universal quality, research-informed reading instruction in our teacher-training establishments and in all schools teaching English.

Even in the United Kingdom, where successive governments of different political parties have supported and promoted 'systematic synthetic phonics' in England - informed by the Clackmannanshire research in Scotland (Johnston and Watson), still the battle continues in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, see the incredible efforts of IFERI committee member, Anne Glennie in Scotland:

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=911

And note the international efforts to challenge the perpetuation of the Reading Recovery programme and methodology and yet still RR prevails (even in England):

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=861

And in England itself, various researchers and intervention organisations still 'don't get it' and continue to put forward challenges to England's official established 'systematic synthetic phonics' - and so it goes on...

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1431

Read all this - and weep for your teachers, the children, and the children's parents and carers...
User avatar
Debbie_Hepplewhite
Posts: 2498
Joined: Sat May 23, 2015 4:42 pm

Re: Aus: 'Dud teachers? In Victoria, it's the lack of phonics that's the problem' by Tina Daniel

Post by Debbie_Hepplewhite »

Yvonne Meyer is on the founding committee of the International Foundation for Effective Reading Instruction. Yvonne was involved personally in the 2005 Australian inquiry into research-informed reading instruction. She has responded to Tina's article with an analysis of current obstacles to research-informed teacher-training and provision in schools:
This article is very good, well written and I agree with everything Tina has said. I would just like to point out the limitations that politicians face when trying to reform the teaching of beginning reading. When Tina writes, "Ministers of education should recognise they need to offer the conditions for achievement for all students…” they’ve done that. All politicians from all sides of politics have done that. They agreed to the recommendations of the NITL 2005, (Australia’s literacy inquiry), and instructed their Departments to follow through.

The blame for not implementing and/ or fudging the implementation is the fault of the bureaucrats in the Departments for Education.

Education Ministers could be blamed for not having sufficient control over their departments to ensure proper follow through but even in that scenario, there are limits on what Ministers can do, For example, the day after the NITL was published, Minister Brendan Nelson left the Education portfolio and took on the Defense portfolio. The new Education Minister came in not knowing a grapheme from a phoneme and was advised by her department.

Politicians can’t step into classrooms and tell teachers what to teach, anymore than they can step into a doctor's surgery and tell doctors how to treat patients. They can’t tell Universities what to teach. Universities have ‘academic freedom’.

I’m not defending politicians for any reason other than an attempt to focus pressure on the people who have the power to reform and not waste energy on those who can’t do what is necessary.

The NITL committee thought about this when we drew up the recommendations. The first 2 set the agenda.

1. The Committee recommends that teachers be equipped with teaching strategies based on findings from rigorous, evidence-based research that are shown to be effective
in enhancing the literacy development of all children.

2. The Committee recommends that teachers provide systematic, direct and explicit phonics instruction so that children master the essential alphabetic code-breaking skills required for foundational reading proficiency. Equally, that teachers provide an integrated approach to reading that supports the development of oral language, vocabulary, grammar, reading fluency, comprehension and the literacies of new technologies.

Other recommendations put responsibility for fixing the problem where it belongs. For example;

8. The Committee recommends that Teaching Australia – Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership, in consultation with relevant professional associations, employers from the government and Catholic school sectors and representatives of the independent school sector, together with relevant teacher institutes and registration bodies, develop and implement national standards for literacy teaching, initial teacher registration, and for accomplished teaching, consistent with evidence-based guides for practice. It is further recommended that these standards form a basis for the accreditation of teacher preparation courses.


11. The Committee recommends that the key objective of primary teacher education courses be to prepare student teachers to teach reading, and that the content of course-work in primary literacy education focus on contemporary understandings of:

• evidence-based findings and an integrated approach to the teaching of reading, including instruction on how to teach phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary knowledge and text comprehension;

• child and adolescent development; and

• inclusive approaches to literacy teaching.

14. The Committee recommends that the conditions for teacher registration of graduates from all primary and secondary teacher education programs include a demonstrated command of personal literacy skills necessary for effective teaching, and a demonstrated ability to teach literacy within the framework of their employment/teaching program.

19. The Australian Government Minister for Education, Science and Training raise these recommendations as issues for attention and action by MCEETYA, and other bodies, agencies and authorities, that will have responsibility to take account of, and implement the recommendations.

20. Progress in implementing these recommendations, and on the state of literacy in Australia, be reviewed and reported every two years.


Educrats are highly skilled at ticking boxes and covering themselves. Let’s put some light on the actions and inactions of the individual Educrats responsible. Maybe then we’ll get the reform our children and our teachers need.

Yvonne
About Yvonne Meyer:

https://iferi.org/members/yvonne-meyer/#more-55

National Inquiry into the Teaching of Reading 2005 (Australia)

http://syntheticphonicscpd.com/aus_enq.pdf
Post Reply