In my previous blog entry I outlined the recent developments
in the US concerning the concept of text complexity. Just to reiterate, the
argument, as put forward in ACT (2006), has been, firstly, that the key thing
which differentiates between students likely to be successful in their later,
college or work, careers are their abilities to successfully read and respond
to harder, more complex texts. Secondly, research seems to suggest that, while
the reading demands of college/University study, of workforce training, and generally
of being a good citizen have held steady or risen over the previous fifty years
or so, the texts used to teach subjects in high school has moved the other way,
that is, become less demanding.
The evidence underpinning these claims derives from the US,
but there are reasons for thinking the situation might equally apply in the UK,
although, it must be stressed, we lack the research evidence to support this as
yet.
If the claims are true, then a number of implications
follow. In this entry, I want to explore one of these which has relevance for
the curriculum and pedagogy experienced by secondary school students in UK
schools.
This implication concerns the blindingly obvious thought
that we really can no longer afford to give such little attention to the
teaching and development of reading in secondary schools. Within the last 40
years (the span of my own career in education) we have experienced at least two
high level ‘pushes’ to develop reading for learning across the curriculum. In
the years following the publication of the Bullock Report (DES, 1975),
“language across the curriculum” became a salient feature in the lives of
secondary school teachers. This led to a plethora of training conferences for
teachers and the publication of numerous, positively-toned books on the subject
– Michael Marland’s “Language across the Curriculum” (1977), and the edited
collection “Reading: Implementing the Bullock Report” produced by
Hunter-Grundin & Grundin (1978) being just two notable examples. However,
as early as 1978, Minovi (1978) felt compelled to write: “What, then, have been
the effects of the Bullock Report in secondary schools? Some are tangible,
others are difficult to identify. Headmasters and many other teachers have been
at least reminded that language is the means by which we learn, and some have learned
it for the first time. ... Many English departments have been made to write
down their aims and objectives, if not actually to think about and discuss
them. By and large, I am forced to conclude that the effect of Bullock has so
far been negligible” (p. 171). Much promise, but little achievement would have
to be the verdict on the effect of the Bullock Report’s recommendation.
By the mid-1990s, attention began to be given once more to
the reading abilities of students at, and after, secondary school. A variety of
sources of evidence emerged that literacy remained a problem for many adults in
the UK. A report on adult literacy (DfEE, 1999) claimed that an estimated
‘seven million adults in England cannot locate the page reference for plumbers
in Yellow Pages’. Statistics produced by Ekinsmyth & Bynner (1994) and
ALBSU (1995) broadly agreed that between one sixth and one eight of adults in
Britain had literacy problems. To this evidence could be added the comments of
Her Majesty’s Inspectorate recorded in their ‘Review of Secondary Education
1993-97’ (DfEE, 1998). HMI found that nationwide:
‘standards of reading are good in
six out of ten schools (but) they
remain unsatisfactory in around one in
seven.
HMI specifically identified that ‘many pupils have weak
skills in using non-fiction’ and that:
‘departments fail to provide
tasks which challenge pupils as readers or offer reading experiences which
enrich and extend the subject beyond the confines of the text book. Furthermore
pupils are not taught how to make effective use of information from books, or
the CD-ROM.’
The evidence seemed clear that secondary schools needed to
give greater consideration to supporting the literacy development of their students.
Consequently, it was not long before the National Literacy Strategy launched in
England in 1997 was extended into secondary schools. Official support documents
(e.g. DfEE, 2001) and our own work (Lewis & Wray, 2000) had a strong impact
when they were published.
Times
change, however, and it is fair to say that the emphasis in the UK today in the
teaching of reading is very much back once again on initial skills, and, given
the forcefulness of the arguments surrounding how beginning reading should be
taught, it is perhaps not surprising that attention to secondary school reading
has waned once more. Yet
this does not mean that the need to extend literacy skills has gone away. On
the contrary, I would argue that it may be precisely an over-emphasis on
initial skills which might create some of the literacy problems that teachers
later have to deal with. We know that, for many youngsters, the problems they
have with reading are related more to their engagement with it (or lack of)
than to their potential to learn the requisite skills (Baker et al, 2000). One
thing which is potentially extremely engaging for young people (particularly
the boys, whose literacy achievement always seems to lag behind that of the
girls) is using their reading to engage with a whole series of interesting
facts and ideas – in other words the use of literacy to encounter, react to and
record “the stuff of the world”, as Arthur Eddington termed it. Extending reading
is essential, therefore, partly because it is a crucial way (and maybe for some
the only way) of giving young people an insight into what reading is good for.
It is also, of course, functionally essential, since the reading and writing
that most of us do every day tends to be done in order to get something done.
Reading our newspapers, our information manuals, our market reports, our
computer screens and writing our notes, our letters of application, our
complaints, our reports – all of these are vital to our working lives and they
all require a lot more than simply a knowledge of phonic cues to accomplish.
It seems that there is still a need to improve the reading
of all secondary school students. This implies a need to strengthen the teaching
of reading in secondary school subjects by incorporating complex reading
materials into the subject content, and, crucially, by providing secondary school
teachers of these subjects with guidance and support to teach the reading and
use of more complex texts. The evidence from the US is that reading is simply
not taught much, if at all, during the secondary school years, not even in
English courses (e.g. Ericson, 2001). There is also evidence that current
standards, curriculum, and teaching practice have not done enough to foster the
independent reading of complex texts which is so crucial for later college and University
work, as well as for most adult careers, particularly in the case of
information texts.
In the United Kingdom, a recent report from the All-Party
Parliamentary Group for Education (2011) raises concerns about the status and
teaching of literacy at secondary school level. It has this to say:
“Literacy is not just a primary school issue. There needs to
be a focus by the Department for Education on post-primary school literacy
issues. Head teachers should be responsible for the literacy levels of their
students. Schools should be developing
cross-departmental strategies to improve literacy, rather than working in
departmental silos. ... More prominence needs to be given to the transition
between primary and secondary school to avoid what David Wray calls ‘the
retreat from print’ that occurs at that time.” (4).
The report goes on to say that, in their survey, secondary
school teachers identified 57% of their pupils as having weak or very weak
literacy skills, but only 6% of these teachers wanted a change in the extent to
which literacy was incorporated into subject lessons. This suggests that it has
been problematic for secondary schools to focus upon literacy as a distinct
issue. Secondary school teachers are simply not used or equipped to teach
skills in their subjects. As the report
says:
“Curriculum pressures often mean that the day is divided
into 40-minute units to teach individual subjects; the result is that teachers
cannot focus long enough on problem areas to deal with them.” (8).
If we want our students not just to encounter but to achieve
mastery over the increasingly complex texts they will encounter as they move
through their lives, one first, crucial step surely has to be that we need a
deliberate policy and strategy for introducing them to progressively more
complex texts. Retreating from print can no longer be a tenable option. We also
need actually to focus on teaching them to make sense of these texts. And that
teaching has to happen not just in English lessons, but in Chemistry, in Maths,
in History etc., etc. We have given token acknowledgement to this for far too
long. We actually have now to do something about it, and the new emphasis
coming from the US on the importance of complex texts could be just the impetus
that is needed.
References
ACT, Inc. (2006). Reading
between the lines: What the ACT reveals about college readiness in reading.
Iowa City, IA: ACT.
Adult Literacy and Basic Skills Unit (1995) Older and younger: the basic skills of
different age groups. London: Adult Literacy and Basic Skills Unit
All-Party Parliamentary Group for Education (2011) Report of the Inquiry into Overcoming the Barriers
to Literacy London: APPG for Education (http://www.educationappg.org.uk/inquiry/)
Baker, J., Dreher,
M. & Guthrie, J. (2000) Engaging
Young Readers New York: Guilford
Department for Education and Employment (1998) Review of Secondary Education 1993-97 London:
Department for Education and Employment.
Department for Education and Employment (1999) Radical change needed to boost basic skills.
A briefing paper on the report ‘A Fresh Start - Improving Literacy and
Numeracy’: Skills and Enterprise briefing, Issue 5/99. London: Department
for Education and Employment
Department for Education and Employment (2001) Literacy Across the Curriculum.
London: Department for Education and Employment.
Department of Education and Science (1975) A Language for Life (The Bullock Report).
London: HMSO
Ekinsmyth. C, & Bynner. J (1994) The Basic Skills of Young Adults, London: ALBSU
Ericson, B. (2001). “Reading in high school English classes:
An overview”. In Ericson, B. (Ed.), Teaching
reading in high school English classes.
Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English, pp. 1–22.
Hunter-Grundin, E. & Grundin, H. (1978) (Eds) Reading: Implementing the Bullock Report.
London: Ward Lock
Lewis, M. & Wray, D. (2000) Literacy in the Secondary School London: David Fulton
Marland, M. (1977) Language
across the Curriculum. London: Heinemann
Minovi, R. (1978) “A blaze of obscurity: ‘Bullock’ in the
comprehensive school”, in David, F. & Parker, R. (Eds) Teaching for Literacy: Reflections on the Bullock Report. London:
Ward Lock, pp 158-172.
No comments:
Post a Comment