Changing schools: How policy implementation can impact on the literacy learning of mobile students

Abstract

SINCE 2002 QUEENSLAND state schools have been required to document a ‘whole school literacy plan’ built around eight essential aspects. This document is to be reviewed annually and updated to reflect the current community profile and the school's literacy curriculum (Education Queensland, 2006). This research project investigated the different ways three early years teachers (Years 1–3) from three adjacent state schools have implemented this policy and what this may mean for students who change schools – particularly the significant number of students known to move between these schools (Hill & Lynch, 2007). Previous research based on test data has shown that changing schools can disrupt learning, particularly in the early years (Strand & Demie, 2006; Temple & Reynolds, 1999) but there has been little or no research into what it might mean for students as literacy learners.

Using a case study approach within a critical theory framework, the current research project found that policy is interpreted and enacted differently in different contexts, creating different ways of doing school and doing literacy. This can result in mobile students having to renegotiate what doing school and doing literacy means.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Anstey

(2002). Literate futures: Reading. Brisbane: Literate Futures Project.

Apple

(2006). Educating the “right” way: markets, standards, God, and inequality (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.

Comber

(2003). Literacy interrupted: ADHD, absence and mobility. Look again: Longitudinal studies of children's literacy learning. Canberra: Primary English Teaching Association.

Comber

, & Cormack

(1997). Looking Beyond ‘Skills’ and ‘Processes’: Literacy as Social and Cultural Practices in Classrooms. Literacy, 31(3), 22–29.

Education Queensland (2000). Literate futures: Report of the literacy review for Queensland state schools (No. 0734519966). Brisbane: Education Queensland.

Education Queensland (2002). Whole-school literacy planning guidelines: Literate futures. Retrieved 23 June 2007, http://education.qld.gov.au/curriculum/learning/literate-futures/wsl-guidelines.html

Education Queensland (2006). Literacy the key to learning: Framework for action 2006–2008. Brisbane: Queensland Government.

Freeman

(1998). Doing teacher research: From inquiry to understanding. Pacific Grove: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.

Hargreaves

, & Dawe

(1990). Paths of professional development: contrived collegiality, collaborative culture, and the case of peer coaching. Teaching and teacher education, 6(3), 227–241.

10.

Heinlein

L. M.

, & Shinn

(2000). School mobility and student achievement in an urban setting. Psychology in the schools, 37(4), 349–357.

11.

Hill

, & Lynch

(2007). Let's stay put. One child, one school, one year. Retrieved 25 October 2007, www.soe.jcu.edu.au/Mobility_Web/index.html

12.

Hill

, Comber

, Louden

, Rivalland

, & Reid

J. A.

(2002). 100 children turn 10: A longitudinal study of literacy development from the year prior to school to the first four years of school (No. 0868039071 (set) 0868039053 (v.1) 0868039055 (v.2)). Canberra: Dept of Education, Science and Training.

13.

Honan

(2004). Teachers as bricoleurs: Producing plausible readings of curriculum documents. English Teaching: Practice and Critique, 3(2), 99–112.

14.

Popkewitz

(1999). Introduction. Critical traditions, Modernisms, and the “posts”. In Popkewitz

& Fendler

(Eds.), Critical theories in education. Changing terrains of knowledge and politics. (pp. 1–16). New York: Routledge.

15.

Strand

, & Demie

(2006). Pupil mobility, attainment and progress in primary school. British Educational Research Journal, 32(4), 551–568.

16.

Temple

, & Reynolds

(1999). School mobility an achievement: Longitudinal findings from an urban cohort. Journal of School Psychology, 37(4), 355–377.