Sustaining interventions: what follows from ‘Catching the sun’?

Woolf Fisher Research CentreThe University of Auckland

Sustaining interventions: what follows from ‘Catching the sun’?

Stuart McNaughton

Keynote address to the 5th International Reading Recovery Institute, Auckland NZ




Maui’s nets The sun was permanently tamed by

the net of twine, cord and ropes.– great evidence

In the current analysis – great sustainability


But educational nets and their permanence?

‘Sustainability may be the central challenge of bringing reforms to scale. Schools that successfully implement reforms find it difficult to sustain them in the face of competing priorities, changing demands and teacher and administrator turn over…’ (Coburn 2003, p.6)


Some conditions (from Coburn)(1) ‘Externally developed school reforms may be especially vulnerable to this problem because implementation typically involves a short-term influx of resources, professional development, and other forms of assistance to facilitate implementation that dissipates over time as external developers turn their attention to other sites…(2) teachers with a deep understanding of the pedagogical principles of reform are better able to respond to new demands and changing contexts in ways that are consistent with the underlying principles of reform, thus sustaining and, at times, deepening reform over time’ (p.6).


The evidence is not good for sustaining reforms in general

For example the experiences of Head Start and Follow Through

Or: Olson (2003) argues reforms based our science of psychology have been spectacularly ineffective; some may even have had negative effects (eg child centered reforms)

(Olson’s argument: most reforms miss the role of school as cultural organisations)


Types of sustainability: ( more contributions from RR?)

Strong evidence for sustainability:– with new cohorts of children– with new cohorts of teachers– maintaining programme integrity over

time– across cultural, social, linguistic and

educational contexts Interesting issues – balance

problems


#5: Developmentally sustained

What happens after an intervention?– near and far development?

Near transfer for RR managed in 2 ways– entry level and strategies for engaging– joint planning to optimise transition


Our ‘far’ problem Subsequent instructional conditions

set channels for development When the channels are constructed

for ‘low’ gradients this creates a more general issue for teaching and learning

This is a major challenge for sustaining early interventions in the context of cultural and linguistically diverse schools (decile 1 schools)


Educational Research & Development

Outcomes

Learner Participation & Involvement

Leadership &

Governance

Physical Resources & Organisation

Educators, Teacher Education & Research

Infrastructure

QualityTeaching

Families & Communities

16- 60% of variance in outcomes

0 to 20.9% of variance in outcomes

About 40-65% of variance in outcomes

Education Indicators Framework for the Early Childhood and Schooling Sectors- Ministry of Education / Alton-Lee (2004)


The situation: (Lai et. al. 2003)

Disparities in reading comprehension for Māori and Pasifika children – international comparisons (high average, long tail) – national comparisons (low decile / Maori and

Pasifika students, low achievement)

Clusters of schools are aware

Existing effective instructional programme in the early years (Phillips et. al. 2004): seen as a school challenge


Participants Seven decile 1 schools, Initiative

Leaders, Woolf Fisher Research Centre, Ministry of Education

60 teachers and their classrooms1900 students in years 4-9

– equal proportions of males and females– four main ethnic groups (Samoan,

Tongan, Māori and Cook Island)– about half with home language other than

English– 5 bilingual classes


General hypothesis: capability within an expanded ‘community’

A research-practice collaboration (1) baseline phase:exploring current

teaching and learning patterns (a design parallel to RR’s ‘roaming’?)

– area-wide analysis of achievement and classroom data

– individual school analysis of data– whole staff sessions– projects to test out teaching ideas– descriptions (interpreted within design)


General profile of reading comprehension

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Stanine

Per

cent

age

of s

tude

nts

PAT

STAR


More importantly: patterns on reading assessments (eg..)

Recall and inference equally ‘low’ Relatively ‘high’ on word recognition Paragraph comprehension most

difficult: across year levels, groups (and mainstream / bilingual classrooms)

Vocabulary range low


Specific hypotheses (a):

Decoding less likely to be the problem– subtest analyses– rates of completion on tests– more anecdotal evidence - running

records


Specific hypotheses (b)Teaching and Learning:

Boost vocabulary– factual and inferential answers both low; ‘vocabulary range’

low on tests

Develop checking & use of evidence– high prediction rates in class: prompting to check occurred 9

times in 16 hours of observations; low Cloze and errors

Increase instructional density– rates of interactions per student low; access to texts low

Incorporate cultural/linguistic resources for texts but bridge to unfamiliar texts

With each focus make activities more explicit


‘error’ analysis from Cloze ‘All they did (could) afford was a tiny room

in a shoe (cottage/house/shop) in a village by a river.’

‘He grabbed frantically, and felt his head (hand(s)/finger(s)) closing around the branch of a tree.’

‘Suddenly, round a sharp bend in the head (road/path/track), he fell again, missed his self (footing/step) and plunged over the ugly (cliff/rock) face.’


Boosting vocabulary Retune core activities (and

interactions) such as reading to A set to detect and enjoy new words

(both teachers and students)– eg ‘Word detectives’:

• ‘Pronking’• Genetically modified organism

Planning topic / theme-based vocabulary


Detecting & checking evidence

Retune core activities (and interactions) such as guided reading / reciprocal teaching

A set to use text evidence (both teachers and students)– for teachers analysis of interact ional

features Close reading of assessment as

activities to solve


Close reading of Cloze test (paragraph comprehension) Instructions

– “The stories below have some blank spaces, where words have been left out. Read the stories and write down the word that you think has been left out, one for each blank. Try to write one word in every space, even if you are not sure what it should be” (STAR, NZCER 2001)


Instructional density Retune core activities

– eg .. amount of time spent in explicit instruction prior to or outside of text reading

For teachers a set to optimise rates of quality interaction per student– eg.. grouping for reading to

A question of resources– eg.. electronic texts– the dictionary problem


Creating bridges: familiar to unfamiliar

Identifying complex thinking in everyday activities and potential parallels with classroom activities eg…

– LOL (metalinguistic awareness)– Hip hop / rap (playing with texts:

polysyllabification)– Church texts (complex vocabulary; move into

interpretation) Note David’s point- yesterdays new text

tomorrow’s prior knowledge Avoiding tendency to homogenise culture


Everyday knowledge eg…Mareko with Deceptikonz rapping :

‘In the morning I woke up frozen and my arms are now broken

If u look closer u will notice dat my shoulders floatin’

(from ‘Stop, drop and roll’ 2003)

His raps might be compared with Jabberwocky (Lewis Carroll ‘Through the Looking Glass’ )

‘Twas brillig, and the slithy tovesDid gyre and gimble in the wabe:…..

(Oxford University Press, 1971 134 – 136)


So...sustainability – some components (a) teaching Teachers and developing expertise

– knowledge and beliefs– actions / strategies (performance)– awareness (control and regulation)

Notice the knowledge here: – theoretically rich– professionally rich– context rich (cultural and linguistic)


Musical expertise: Deborah Wai Kapohe, Moana


Sporting expertise: Carlos Spencer, Beatrice Faumuina


(b) Professional learning Community (eg. Timperley 2003)

Shared norms and values – eg all students can learn / teaching effects

Focus on student learning– evidence-based

Reflective dialogue Deprivatising practice Collaboration

– use of evidence– checking practices

Very like the properties of RR


Distribution across all stanines

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Stanine

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of

stu

de

nts

STAR beginning of year

STAR end of year


Developmental sustainability-Reading Recovery? Beliefs, knowledge, practices of

‘near’ and ‘far’ teachers? Specific practices to build on RR

after year 1 and 2? The question of teaching and

learning comprehension, especially for culturally and linguistically diverse students?

Our local and global village


Documents

Sustaining interventions: what follows from ‘Catching the sun’?