The concept of literacy is very complex as it has many meanings attached to it and is used in both literal and metaphorical ways (Christie & Mission, 1998). Consequently, there have been many theories and debates about what literacy is and how it is best taught in school (Christie, 1990).
My personal literacy development at school began when I entered Kindergarten in 1994 as a student eager to learn to read and write. Prior to starting school my parents had regularly read to me and helped me develop my concepts of print e.g. text direction, front and back of books and some simple vocabulary. One of my favourite books was Are You My Mother by P.D. Eastman.
Kindergarten was a voyage of discovery with the development of a 200 instantly recognised sight word bank that were then incorporated into sentences and stories that I could fluently read. At the same time my teacher developed my knowledge of sounds and how they blend together to form words. She also used Big Books e.g. Dan the Flying Man by Joy Cowley to develop knowledge of how language worked. As well we were read texts from the library, both factual and fictional, which were used to develop our comprehension skills. By the time I left Kindergarten I could read fluently and write simple stories and information texts.
Throughout the rest of my primary years these skills were developed and refined as I was introduced to a wider variety of text types e.g. explanations and expositions, and expected to both read and write in a variety of genre.
In my high school years literacy broadened to include metalanguage for different subject areas and more research style learning that included the use of computers and the internet thus developing my computer literacy.
As you can see my experiences of literacy learning were broad and can be traced back to methods employed by teachers from at least the 1940s to the present day.
Early literal definitions of literacy in education, starting in 19th century colonial Australia saw literacy as simply reading and writing (Christie, 1990; Christie & Mission, 1998). Literacy’s importance was seen in terms of moral development (through being able to read the bible and other self-improving texts), as only a select number of jobs in Australia actually required an employee to read or write (bank employees) (Christie & Mission, 1998; Christie, 1990).
This then evolved to include not just reading and writing but also speaking, listening and other forms of semiotics, that is, signs and symbols which portray meaning e.g. images, dance, music (Anstey & Bull, 2004; Christie & Mission, 1998) reflecting on the changes society had faced including the increasing need for citizens of Australia to be ‘literate’(Christie, 1990).
Literacy education in contemporary Australia is seen as having great importance as it creates educated citizens who are able to actively participate in the workforce and thus enhance the economic aspirations of the nation (Christie & Mission, 1998; Christie, 1990).
The current NSW K-6 English Syllabus written in 1998 defines literacy as:
The ability to read and use written information and to write appropriately in a range of contexts. It is used to develop knowledge and understanding, to achieve personal growth and to function effectively in our society. Literacy involves the integration of speaking, listening and critical thinking with reading and writing (Board of Studies (BOS) NSW, 1998, p.5).
However, the draft of the incoming Australian national curriculum shows that this definition has expanded in the 21st century to refer to
a flexible, sustainable command of a set of capabilities in the use and production of traditional texts and new communications technologies, using spoken language, print and multimedia (Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority, 2010, online).
The metaphorical uses of the term literacy involve considering literacy in Functional, cultural, personal and critical terms (Christie & Mission, 1998). These terms refer to the way people learn to, learn about or learn through semiotic systems and literacy, and will be discussed in relation to the general trends of models of language development and literacy used in Australia since the 1940s (Anstey & Bull, 2004). It must be noted that not all schools followed these trends as some didn’t have all the materials for a particular trend or the teachers simply didn’t use them and sometimes teachers incorporated more than one method into their teaching as was the case for my own literacy development in my early years of school (Anstey & Bull, 2004).
Functional literacy refers to the operational level or ‘how to’ of literacy (Anstey & Bull, 2004). That is, “in order to understand the different kinds of information and their associated methods of reasoning, students must learn the language patterns in which these things are encoded” including how words, sentences and books are constructed (Christie & Mission, 1998). This term captures the ideas that for a person to be fully functional or to survive in society they need to have a certain level of literacy (Anstey & Bull, 2004). For my first few years of schooling this was the view which underpinned the NSW K-6 English syllabus written in 1994. This syllabus, which lasted only until 1998 as a more critical view of literacy was brought in, stated that the functional view of language was “concerned with relationships between context, language structure and meaning” (Board of Studies NSW, 1994, p.2).
My literacy experience incorporated many aspects of the trends from the past. The first being ‘Look and say’. Look and say was the general trend taken in the 1940s and early 1950s (Anstey & Bull, 2004). This method was a form of rote learning or learning through repetition as students were required to memorise whole words they were given and then expected to reproduce and read them (Anstey & Bull, 2004). Students can have early success in reading with this method because it improves fluency but does not assist students to work out words they have not previously learnt. This method did not usually teach understanding of words in sentences. Therefore it falls under the metaphorical approach of functional literacy.
My contact with the Look and Say method of teaching in the 1990s was as part of an eclectic approach to reading instruction. I was given whole words with corresponding pictures to memorise, read, write and use in sentences. For example, I can see the cat and the fish. All the words were taught separately as sight words and then the words were embedded in sentences with other words I had learnt.
The next method of teaching that evolved in the 1950s and 1960s was the Phonic method (Anstey & Bull, 2004). Phonics involves the learning of sounds and how words are constructed from these sounds (Henderson, 1986). Therefore, this method helps students learn how words are constructed and as such helps them with spelling, writing and reading unfamiliar words where with the look and say method students would not be able to read a word they had not memorised (Anstey & Bull, 2004). This method goes further with the functional approach to literacy than does the Look and Say method in that students are not simply memorising words, they are actually learning how words work and function (Christie & Mission, 1998). As with the Look and Say method however, it too does not teach students to take meaning from the words or how the words make meaning in sentences (Anstey & Bull, 2004). There is no room for any of the other metaphorical approaches to literacy. That is, cultural, personal or critical literacy which will be seen in some of the later methods. That is not to say that these methods are not worthwhile however, each has its benefits and if used with other methods as in my literacy development they can be significant stepping stones to creating ‘literate’ students at all levels both literal and metaphorical (Anstey & Bull, 2004). This method was also a part of my early literacy experiences. I was introduced to single sounds then blends, digraphs etc in a sequential manner. These were tested and I remember racing my class rival to master my 60 phonic development cards, spanning 13 levels, which went from single sounds and blends through to the use of syllabification. I also remember receiving a reward for completing these cards. This reward was called a Gold Licence which meant that if you received your Gold Licence you had the privilege of helping other students practise their reading and so complete the levels. I distinctly remember how devastated I was when my rival classmate only just beat me to be the first student to receive a Gold Licence.
The 1960s and early 1970s saw the introduction of reading schemes as a model of literacy and language development in Australian schools (Anstey & Bull, 2004). This method involved the use of a small range of books which were graded so that students at a particular level could read a book which used the vocabulary of that level (Anstey & Bull, 2004). This method was usually carried out alongside a phonics program and as students widened their vocabulary they would go up a level in the graded books (Henderson, 1986). This approach allowed students to read whole stories instead of bits and pieces or just words not in sentences and as it was carried out alongside a phonics program students were able to work out how to read unfamiliar words while also learning the meanings of those words with the help of the illustrations in the stories (Anstey & Bull, 2004). One of the negative aspects of this model was the limited amount of choice found with the books; they were almost always narratives and there was a limited selection in each grade (Anstey & Bull, 2004). Functional literacy again, was the main theoretical underpinning to this model through developing the skills in students to be able to function effectively in society (Anstey & Bull, 2004). This model did however have the potential to incorporate a level of critical literacy among students as well. My Kindergarten teacher developed a scheme based on this and in Years One to Two Young Australia books were incorporated into my experiences. I remember in Year Two my teacher rewarded me with a certificate for completing level 7 in the Young Australia books.
Critical literacy is an approach concerned largely with equipping students with the skills to decode the meaning of words and texts enabling them to understand the power of texts and ways they can be manipulated through texts (Anstey & Bull, 2004; Christie & Mission, 1998). Arguments behind the approach of critical literacy are based around the idea that students need to have an understanding of how texts are constructed so they can not only reproduce them if needed but also critique and form opinions about these texts (Christie & Mission, 1998). Where the 1994 NSW K-6 English syllabus followed the view of functional literacy, the 1998 NSW K-6 English syllabus emphasised this development of critical literacy in students. It states that critical literacy involves “students questioning, challenging and evaluating the texts that they listen to, read and view” enabling them to “perceive how texts position readers to take a particular view of people and events” (BOS NSW, 1998, p.5). As mentioned earlier, in my own literacy development this critical literacy was developed through a range of activities but perhaps the most memorable was through the use of Big Books. These were large books enabling a whole class to sit on the floor in front of the teacher while he or she read the story and the class read along while looking at the pictures. This activity in itself did not develop my critical literacy but the questions asked by the teacher did. Questions were asked about the way characters were shown in pictures and how those things such as a smile or the colour of clothing match the story? As well as this we would be asked how the story would be changed if these things were changed? This kind of questioning even at a kindergarten level challenged me to think about how stories and pictures are used to create meaning and if put together differently then they create different meanings.
Language experience was the next general trend to occur in schools throughout the late 1960s to the 1970s (Anstey & Bull, 2004). Language experience was an attempt to stop the use of graded readers and instead use material provided by the students which incorporated their own experiences (Anstey & Bull, 2004; Henderson, 1986). Other books were supplied to meet the interests of students and were no longer graded books (Anstey & Bull, 2004). This method arose from the Sociolinguistic theory perspective which saw literacy as a social practice and aimed to engage students on a more personal level in their literacy learning focussing on their social class background and language experiences at home (Anstey & Bull, 2004). There were some examples of this where the teacher’s used students’ experiences to create class stories, in newsprint books, that were read every day for a week. This model although quite successful was very time-consuming and could be limited at times when only the students supplied the language (Anstey & Bull, 2004).
Personal literacy can be clearly seen to be incorporated into this model as it aimed to cater for the differences among students and their experiences. Personal literacy involves making literacy tasks relate to students on a personal level bringing about further learning (Christie & Mission, 1998). Before I began school, my mother would take pictures of myself and my family and write short stories to go with them, making them into a small book. She would then read me the stories and show me the pictures in an attempt to have me engage with the text and improve my understanding of how language tied in with my own life. This activity helped me learn to read and draw meaning from words through this concept of personal literacy. The 1998 NSW K-6 English syllabus employed aspects of this approach stating that students who become competent in English would learn about “language in their own lives” and thus be able to communicate their ideas and make positive decisions throughout personal and social issues (BOS NSW, 1998, p.6). Many writing tasks set in my early years related to personal literacy.
Cultural literacy can also be seen at work through the language experience model. Cultural literacy refers to the recognition of the role of culture in literacy and the features of literacy which are specific to a culture or that a person of a particular culture should understand (Anstey & Bull, 2004; Christie & Mission, 1998). In Australia the dominant culture in schools is generally the white Australian culture (Anstey & Bull, 2004). Students who come from another background to school may have to learn more in this area than students coming from the dominant culture as these students would have already acquired some of this cultural capital from their home and experiences (Anstey & Bull, 2004). The 1998 NSW K-6 English syllabus recognised this importance stating that through English, students would be required to learn about the function of language in “their own and other cultures” and to “think about the influence of culture on the meanings made with language” (BOS NSW, 1998, p.6).
Reading schemes again became a prominent method in the 1970s and early 1980s although there were some changes to them (Anstey & Bull, 2004). There was a greater range of books to choose from at different levels and many different authors and illustrators were used (Anstey & Bull, 2004). There were also different types of genres used and instead of being used only alongside phonics, a range of other materials were used as well including comprehension and research skill materials (Anstey & Bull, 2004). This increased the effectiveness of this method in terms of critical literacy, allowing questioning of the texts and the meanings portrayed in the texts (Christie & Mission, 1998). This method came about during a time of debate over the Psycholinguistic cognitive theory which emphasised that reading was concerned with acquiring meaning from print with the help of knowledge the reader already had of the subject and the sociolinguistic theory mentioned above (Henderson, 1986). Up until the early 1990s the dominant view was the cognitive view although as can be seen with this later version of reading schemes, the sociolinguistic view had some impact (Christie & Mission, 1998). Around the mid 1990s and the idea of sociolinguistic theory became the more prominent and accepted view (Anstey & Bull, 2004). This method had the potential to incorporate the four mentioned metaphorical views of literacy. Critical literacy was mentioned above, personal literacy could be developed through the use of books which linked with their experiences, cultural literacy could be developed through the varied authors and diversity among the stories and functional literacy could be developed through the skills students would learn through the actual reading of the texts as well as the activities such as comprehension after reading the text.
All these methods were still in use during the 1990s, as can be seen through my examples of my own literacy development. The focus on functional literacy however was not given as much weight during my later primary school years with critical literacy becoming the more prominent approach (Board of Studies NSW, 1994; BOS NSW, 1998). New methods of aiming for the further development of critical literacy included a genre approach which “emerged as a structured and explicit way of examining the purpose of texts and the social contexts in which they were used” (Anstey, 2002, p.47).
By Kareena Henderson
No comments:
Post a Comment