QJER logo 2
[ Contents Vol 18, 2002 ] [ QJER Home ]

A profile of the teaching of reading in an upper primary school classroom

Teresa Woolacott
Much has been written on reading theory and how to teach emergent readers to read. In contrast, research in Australia in recent years has highlighted the lack of development of reading abilities in the middle years of schooling and of a lack of direction and support for teachers. As an initial foray into discovering what reading instruction looks like in the upper primary school, I spoke with an experienced primary school teacher who was at that time (2001) teaching a Year 7 class. Through a series of three taped interviews, teacher Q discussed her views, experiences and classroom practices in the area of reading. While a variety of approaches were discerned, personal philosophy appeared to be a strong determinant of teacher decisions and practice.


A significant finding of the National School English Literacy Survey (NSELS) in 1997 was a distinct lack of development in literacy skills of students in the middle years of schooling. Note that 'Middle years' as it is referred to here relates to the upper primary year levels and the lower grades in secondary school; while 'middle primary' refers to Years three, four and five in the primary school. For many students, literacy proficiency stagnates after the early years of schooling. Given the shift in emphasis from learning to read in the lower primary school, to reading to learn in the upper primary years, coupled with the need for an increased reading load across content areas in secondary school, this lack of development in the middle years of schooling is of concern.

In a report by Luke and Freebody (2000) on literacy instruction in Queensland state schools, the teaching of reading was highlighted as a priority area. Luke and Freebody found 'a general loss of focus on in-service work and further professional upgrading in the teaching of reading', 'a marked lack of expertise in and focus on the teaching of reading in the middle years and virtually no evidence of such expertise and focus in the secondary years' and 'an overall lack of systemic direction and guidance from Education Queensland and universities and professional organisations on the teaching of reading' (p. 75). They also pointed to pre-service training in reading as 'highly variable' resulting in a multiplicity of practices, approaches and metalanguages.

These findings prompt questions about what happens in reading classrooms in the middle years of schooling and what teachers consult in deciding how to teach reading. Knowledge of practices and influences on reading instruction would allow for critical reflection on practice and philosophy, a necessary aspect of any professional activity. It is of timely importance as Queensland schools prepare for the implementation of Whole School Literacy Plans and the adoption of the 'Four Resources Model' proposed by Luke and Freebody (1999).

In recent years much has been written about the so called 'reading wars', of Whole Language versus phonics, explicit versus implicit teaching,. Often these discussions have focussed on the beginning reader. Research involving readers in the later years of primary school have tended to spotlight problems that specific readers may be experiencing. That is, much research in this area focusses on the development of a particular area or skill of reading such as comprehension (Katims & Harris 1997) or vocabulary (Harmon 1998). Very little exists to suggest how a teacher approaches the teaching of reading in the context of an upper primary classroom. While it is very important to address reading problems in this part of the school, it is just as important to formulate a plan for the continued development of the majority of class members who do cope with reading. Identification of what is occurring in upper primary classrooms, drawing on experienced teachers' knowledge, would be useful in determining a framework of emphases and pedagogies relevant to this context. One way of tracking the effects on a teacher's approach to the teaching of reading is to identify underlying beliefs and theories.

READING THEORY

The teaching of reading has been characterised over the last few decades by changes in theory involving views on the reading process, the learner and cognition, and reading as social practice. As these theories have evolved and been disseminated, they have been translated into a variety of pedagogical practices and accompanying materials. Commitment to a particular theory (for example, 'Whole Language' or phonics) has in the past led to polarisation in practices with theorists vehemently defending their stances (see Chall 1992, Emmitt 1998, Luke & Freebody 1999). However, for the most part, I would argue that teachers are generally eclectic when it comes to theoretical and pedagogical application. They listen to, read and view new thought, adopting and adapting practices and theories depending on their own philosophies, contexts and needs. As such, a teacher's approach to reading may include elements of a variety of theoretical views. Historically, views on reading can be classified into three broad categories: 'reading as a hierarchy of skills, reading as a psycholinguistic process, reading as social practice' (Emmitt 1998, p. 2).

In considering reading as skills, the physical reading process is emphasised. A hierarchy of skills is identified and practised until an individual is competent in the reading act. This approach was evident prior to the 1970s and utilised much 'skill and drill'. Basal reading schemes were an element of this approach, with meaning and understanding of written text assumed to develop naturally with competence. The psycholinguistic stance entailed a focus on the learner and cognition, shifting from skills to meaning. An individual reader's prior knowledge was recognised as influential in interpreting the meaning of texts. Strategic approaches to reading and the Whole Language philosophy came to prominence under the psycholinguistic umbrella. Consequently, basal readers began to make way for literature based reading programs.

More recently, attention has been drawn to the social and cultural context of readers and text, thus highlighting reading as a social practice. Social theory in relation to reading came to the fore in the 1980s. It emphasised the interaction between the author's text and the reader, both of which are culturally and socially positioned. The inclusion of studies in genres and the importance of critical literacy are aspects of social approaches to reading.

Luke and Freebody's (2000) Four Resource Model for reading, where the reader is involved in four practices - as code breaker; meaning maker; text user; and text analyst - is an application of a socio-critical perspective. As a code breaker, the reader uses graphophonic, grammatical and semantic knowledge to work out what the text says. As a meaning maker, the reader assigns meaning to the text, me diated by their social and cultural understandings and experiences. As a text user, the reader considers text from the point of view of consumer (that is, how to use the text). As a text analyst, the reader deconstructs the text to uncover ideologies, viewpoints, gaps, silences and bias. This model is seen as subsuming and expanding upon historical approaches to reading, and in so doing down plays the debates surrounding methodologies.

It is possible to view instruction that includes consideration of the individual, the act and the social dimensions of reading as desirable. Indeed, Rivalland (2001) encourages an eclectic approach as it is unlikely that one 'right methodology' will emerge. While a mixture of methodologies may be adopted, skill and acuity are required in ensuring those applied are complementary. Besides matching methodologies with the needs, abilities and characteristics of specific groups of students, teachers must be aware of which methodologies may and may not work together to provide effective pedagogy.

ABOUT THE STUDY

This research aimed to identify reading instruction practices and possible influences on these of a Year 7 teacher. A series of three interviews held over a period of several weeks was conducted with a teacher (identified as teacher Q) in the school context where Q was currently teaching. These interviews were audio-taped and transcribed. A content analysis was then undertaken of these transcriptions, mediated by observations from a research journal that was kept by the researcher. Since this study was not about identifying best practice but about exploring teaching practice and influences, participant selection proved no great difficulty. I chose to approach a teacher with experience of the upper primary context in the hope that practices used were easily recalled and identified and that reasons for the use of these readily articulated.

Qualitative research is seen as particularly appropriate to the educational arena and semi-structured interviews appear as a tool capable of providing focussed information and suggesting future research directions (Hitchcock & Hughes 1995). The interviews undertaken took the guise of semi-structured 'elite' interviews. That is to say, the interviewer used a variety of open and closed questions to explore the topic with an individual (Q) considered to speak with authority on the topic (following Gillham 2001).

The interview structure was based on that promoted by Seidman (1991) including a series of three 90 minute interviews. The first interview focussed on obtaining a professional history of teacher Q while the second interview aimed to uncover details of Q's present reading instructional practices. The third interview required Q to listen to and comment on a summary of the previous two interviews, and to add or clarify any points that she wished to address. The third interview therefore provided a way of validating my interpretations and offered opportunities for Q to clarify and add to the interview summaries. With this structure, it was necessary for transcriptions to be done between interviews. On completion of the interview series, a content analysis was undertaken.

Initially, the content analysis focussed on classifying practices and related beliefs mentioned by Q, as well as any other apparent themes. Identified practices and beliefs were then categorised according to underlying theoretical stances. A further analysis sought to clarify elements of the four practices as promoted by Luke and Freebody (1997, 1999).

FINDINGS

Aims of reading instruction in the upper primary school

Analysis of the transcripts of the three interviews showed that Teacher Q's approach to the teaching of reading ranges across all major approaches identified (skills, psycholinguistic and social). In this Year 7 context, Q addresses some skill work with her students, and there is a clear emphasis on meaning, prior knowledge and critical abilities. However, an overriding theme of her approach is an accent on the affective domain. The primary objective of reading instruction in this classroom is the enjoyment of reading. Individual skills and elements of prior knowledge are addressed, not only for the sake of being able to decode and interpret text, but particularly as barriers to enjoyment.

Reading as fun

An emphasis on enjoyment stems from Q's personal passion for reading. Her love of reading then impacts on her philosophy of the teaching of reading, encompassing an appreciation of reading as a source of 'fun', and as a practical skill:
I guess in terms of philosophy, my philosophy is that no child should get out of primary school without being able to read ... and at least for me to have helped them to enjoy it and to get pleasure from it; for it to be fun and exciting, as well as useful and pragmatic.
Promotion of reading as fun is seen as the primary focus. Q cites several instances of having 'fun' with class reading. One situation involved the completion of a Book-It reading scheme where the whole class had to read a specified number of books at home within a given period of time. This challenge culminated in a class outing to a local restaurant for a meal and the cinema to view a movie, accompanied by Q, dressed in pyjamas and slippers.

Another fun activity came in the guise of 'combat reading':

(W)e came up with this format of combat reading where they had to ... come up with some ideas about what they think was happening in the text, that they had to justify them, and with some of them, their way of justifying was really just to shout louder - to have an opinion, not back it up, and shout - so we called it combat reading. [I would say:] 'So if you're going to beat me, you're really going to have to have a more mature way of arguing, or you are just not going to do very well in battle, guys' ... but it was fun, because they would read and they'd think, 'Now how can I beat the old bat?'
The promotion of reading as fun therefore incorporates an aspect of teacher personality. The challenges set for the class by Q involve a reflection of her sense of fun and what she considers will appeal to her students. Dressing for the movies in pyjamas and slippers, or referring to herself as 'the old bat' are signs of Q's personality and sense of fun. Such characteristics are carried over into vocabulary study where Q gives impromptu role-plays to portray word meanings. The fun injected into instructional strategies then serves to create enjoyable experiences around reading and to promote content knowledge.

Reading lessons

The structure and content of Q's reading lessons incorporate a skills dimension (for example, the practice of reading aloud, vocabulary and decoding), but the emphasis is on the construction of meaning and therefore borrows more from psycholinguistic and social approaches. Gaining meaning and critically analysing a text can be seen as the main focus through elements such as the types of groups used, the use of discussion and the types of questions posed.

Teacher Q holds two or three lessons a week devoted to reading. She makes reference to the school reading program and supplements this with the First Steps reading guide for greater detail and direction. Q blends the information in these documents with her own preferences and perceptions of student needs to formulate her reading curriculum plan. She does not use the reading scheme available to the Year 7 classes as the set readers utilise extracts rather than whole novels, which Q considers extremely unsatisfactory.

Q's preference is for complete novels or texts as a focus in reading lessons. As a whole class, a new text is discussed in terms of plot and characters, and then the text is read in mixed ability groups. Subsequent lessons begin with a recapitulation of the story to date and a comparison to earlier predictions, prior to considering further questions about plot, character development and evaluations. Any challenging vocabulary is discussed. Students then continue to read the text i n their groups. At the conclusion of the lesson Q may pose some questions orally or may list some written questions for students to answer.

Q makes use of mixed ability groups as a way of improving the self-concept of poorer readers, and of moving them past the focus on decoding and onto meaning. Mixed ability grouping is seen as a way around the slow pace at which a group of poorer readers will progress through a text. Maintaining a comfortable reading pace through a text helps the poorer reader to focus on the text's meaning. Q says of 'really poor readers':

I'm finding that their ability to read out aloud has improved, and I've also found that their comprehension has improved from being exposed to the better readers; and every year I find that.
Q's experiences have shown her that poorer readers in mixed ability groups develop an ability to understand and interact around a text even if their decoding skills are not strong. Groups are therefore constructed through interesting combinations of individuals who will interact productively around a text.

Some work is done on decoding as the need arises, but Q believes that decoding skills may also be 'caught' from others. This social aspect to learning is again apparent in students' experience with vocabulary. It is Q's contention that, left to their own devices, students will gloss over unknown words without investigating their meaning:

If they're reading a book on their own then if they don't know a word, you never see a kid get a dictionary out to check that word. It never happens ... so, the learning of vocab is really a shared thing, and unless a kid will actually say to you, 'what does "conspicuous" mean?', and you can tell them, it's gone. ... It is amazing how often they haven't picked it up from context either. They might have an idea but they haven't got the nuances, which you as an adult who will understand it, can give them, and give them a variety of contexts in which that word is used.
This experience with vocabulary is another way of reinforcing the importance of constructing meaning from a text. Q does not speak about the decoding of the word but about its meaning, and alludes to how meanings can vary depending on social and cultural contexts. Word building aspects of vocabulary study are left for the spelling curriculum.

Except for fulfilling her obligation to read as a member of a group in reading lessons, Q does not regularly read to the class. She stresses that given a lack of time, it is better to share a number of short books in reading lessons where greater opportunity is offered for discussion in small groups, than to read to the whole class from one long book with less chance for interaction. Q also points out that reading books in small groups allows for the visual reinforcement of words, not just the aural rendition of words as is offered when reading to the whole class. A lack of time was also cited for not providing timetabled opportunity for silent reading.

The emphasis in reading lessons changes throughout the year in Q's classroom. At the beginning of the year, Q concentrates on getting students to enjoy reading and so uses parent helpers with groups to work on the amount of reading done. Q also uses this time to develop a profile of the class as a whole in respect to reading skill and comprehension ability. Throughout the year, texts are chosen for their ability to develop various comprehension skills, expand vocabulary and general knowledge, and encourage student interaction. By the end of the year, Q uses texts for more focussed critical analysis, and discussion skills developed throughout the year are extended into debating.

Comprehension

In Q's classroom, much work is done in the initial part of the year on extending the students beyond the literal level of comprehension. Comprehension of texts is attacked on two fronts: first, via questions and discussions about the text; and second, through the development of vocabulary and general knowledge. Questions posed by the teacher about the text are discussed orally in group situations and then through individual written responses. Questions posed involve evaluations of character development, predictions, and awareness of decisions made by the author. These questions involve the roles of text analyst and text critic identified by Luke and Freebody (2000). This type of questioning is applied by Q to visual text (for example, the film 'Gallipoli') as well as written texts.

Q also addresses particular topics within the texts being studied. A theme may be examined in several books - for example, the issue of stereotyping in fairy tales. Not only is the issue identified, but its relevance to everyday life is discussed. How culture affects literature and vice versa is put under the spotlight. Individuals are asked to draw parallels to their personal experiences, that is, their prior knowledge. Justification for students' opinions is regularly requested. The instigation of 'combat reading' was in response to the perceived need for students to verify their statements.

At the beginning of the year, Q was using reading comprehension cards, which are indicative of a skills approach and in contrast to her preferred style of practice. As students were not handling these successfully, Q ceased using these cards, preferring to develop comprehension through discussion. Anstey and Bull (1996) point out that the practice of asking questions of carefully sequenced passages or texts of increasing difficulty, as found in comprehension cards utilised in skills approaches, may engage students in comprehension activities but does not teach them how to comprehend effectively. Q's experience would support this contention.

Reading materials

As mentioned earlier, Q dislikes the use of basal readers that include a variety of excerpts and prefers to use short novels for the students to read. Texts are generally chosen with ability levels, student needs and availability in mind. As Q uses the same text for all students, multiple copies of the text need to be available. Since mixed ability groups are utilised, an average level of readability for the class is sought. Other texts may be selected with content in mind. Content may be suggested by identification of student needs or interests, or by reference to the First Steps guide. For instance, for the study of stereotyping, a selection of fairy tales, written at a level appropriate to Year 7 students, was located. An old Endeavour basal reader was also utilised.

The Australian Democratic Reader was enlisted as a text to address a perceived lack of historical knowledge. Another text, The Kimberley Warrior, was chosen because of what it could add to the discussion on racism, an area in which Q perceived a less than open-minded approach by her students. While The Australian Democratic Reader incorporates a variety of genre (for example, poems, reports, expositions), Q tends to concentrate on narratives. While she admits that comprehension of non-fiction texts is important to help them learn better skills for their projects, Q believes that narratives are best for teaching reading:

You get kids who hate to read - hate novels - so they always choose non-fiction. In most year levels, I've found two or three kids whose preference is non-fiction. You struggle to get them to read a novel so their exposure to novels is what you do ... (F)or the reading scheme that I run where you read at home, they'll frequently [read] something like 'Australia's Deadliest Spiders' - whatever topic they're interested in - motor cars [for example] ... But it always staggers me to think, 'How could you not want to read?'
The implication here is that those who choose non-fiction do not like reading and that people who like reading will naturally select novels. This is a rather narrow view of reading.

Q uses a home-reading program such as the 'Pizza Hut Book-It' scheme as a motivational tool to have students read at home. Having the students read is seen as an initial step in developing an enjoyment of reading. Within the home-reading program, and for group reading, Q enlists the aid of parents. Interacting around text with parents is seen as important, and can be seen as an element of both psycholinguistic and social approaches to reading.

In summary, then, the texts Q uses are selected with availability, student need and instructional aims in mind. The focus is on narratives although some poetry, expositions and non-fiction texts are used at times. Written text may also be supplemented with visual texts such as film, and oral forms such as debating. A variety of books is incorporated through the home reading scheme (though non-fiction is discouraged).

Evidence of theoretical approaches

Although enjoyment of reading is of primary importance in Q's teaching of reading, this is merely an overarching motivational consideration. The substantive consideration is about the three approaches previously identified, that is, the skills approach, the psycholinguistic approach and the social approach. Elements of all three approaches can be seen in Q's practice and belief statements.

A skills orientation can be discerned in Q's reference to decoding skills and the use of visual stimulation for word memory. However, Q does not practice such skills within reading lessons. Word building strategies are addressed in the spelling program but Q does not see this as part of reading instruction.

Aspects of comprehension - literal, inferential, critical and creative - are important to Q. She uses comprehension worksheets to evaluate comprehension abilities across the Year 7 classes at her school. Written activities such as these are seen as providing formal feedback on student reading comprehension.

Q's preference, however, is for oral questioning, where the students can talk about what they have read in order to clarify understanding. In the interviews, explicit instruction in reading skills was not fore-grounded. It was mentioned that particular needs were addressed as they arose, but given the negative self-concept of poorer readers at this end of the primary school, Q chose to concentrate on gaining meaning from text and dealing with decoding incidentally or through the spelling program.

In discussion of reading throughout the primary school, Q claimed that the emphasis on skills prevalent in the infant classes decreased as students moved up the school. She used the term 'functional', which is reminiscent of the skills approach focussing on developing skills that would enable an individual to function within society:

I guess if you're looking at lower, middle and upper school.. it's functional; in the middle grades it's still functional, but you're teaching them not just the decoding skills but the whole, whole way language works in paragraphs and the way authors express ideas and stuff like that. So, it's still functional (in the upper classes) - but you want to move on and broaden their literacy base and [broaden] their exposure to a variety of literature.
Expressed in these terms, one would expect Q's outlook to be strongly skills based, as the broadening exposure to literature can still be attributed to traditional styles of teaching. However, her emphasis on meaning construction and interaction around text moves her outlook past a skills emphasis.

A psycholinguistic approach to the teaching of reading is apparent through Q's insistence on the use of whole texts, the teaching of skills in context, and the interpretation of text based on prior knowledge. Attention to broadening the students' knowledge about language (for example, through studying similes and metaphors as they occur in some texts) and to enhancing their general and historical knowledge are seen as pertinent to developing understanding and enjoyment in reading a text. It is interesting to note Q's denunciation of the application of Whole Language theory when, in fact, several of her practices can be classified as such. This may result from a particular interpretation of Whole Language teaching, especially its identification with implicit teaching and its frequent juxtaposition with explicit phonics instruction (see, for example, Chall 1992). Q says:

(W)hen the Whole Language approach came in, I was teaching in the lower school. ... When people started to talk about it, it sounded really wonderful. But when you actually thought of the practicalities of what kids needed to do for learning to read, it wasn't sufficient. And the teachers that were doing it well and successfully were also incorporating an awful lot of all of that - phonic work and all the other stuff - and integrating writing in your reading that wasn't actually a part of the Whole Language as it was presented.
The inaccurate portrayal of Whole Language may be part of the explanation, but when Q's practices are analysed according to the conditions of literacy learning (basic to the Whole Language movement) as identified by Cambourne (2000), there is much overlap. While Cambourne's conditions are identified with particular reference to 'learner-readers', the sentiments and practices are still valid in the upper primary context. This was apparent in Q's classroom through the use and demonstration of a variety of authentic texts, and expectations of student responsibility for learning.

Added to elements of psycholinguistic approaches to teaching reading in Q's classroom are elements of a social view. In defining 'literacy', Q advanced the importance of prior knowledge in making meaning during reading, but included an ability to interact with the world:

To think about what you're reading and relate that to your own experiences of what you already know, and, taking that further, to be really literate, you would read something and think 'I want to know more about that' [using it] as a springboard for moving, for learning more - a springboard for interacting with the world.
Q's sentiments as stated here are reminiscent of Freire's view of literacy as reading the world as well as the word. (Anstey & Bull 1996) What is read is seen to affect, and be affected by, the individual's interaction with their environment. Q's instructional style can be seen not just to focus on what content knowledge is learned from the reading of the text (for example, vocabulary, historical and geographical knowledge) but also a way of interacting with text. Students are expected to voice opinions and justifications about what is read. They must discuss texts with others in their class and with their parents. Students are expected to look beyond the story plot to uncover social and cultural nuances, and to make interpretations about authorial decisions. The author's use of plot, theme and stereotyping are discussed, but so too are questions about how these relate to the students themselves and how instances of these may be replayed in everyday life. Knowledge of language is put into practice by students in other classroom activities - for example, knowledge of expository texts is used in debates, and the use of theme and stereotypes as seen in various texts is to be used by students in their own writing.

Relevance to 'Four Resources Model'

Q's instructional practices used a range of theoretical bases, and the inclusion of the First Steps guide, which makes use of Luke and Freebody (2000) concepts, positions Q well in relation to the proposed adoption of the Four Resources Model in Queensland schools. This framework is also useful for determining existing emphases in this teacher's practice.

Promotion of 'Code Breaker' practices

In the account of her instructional practices, Q did not emphasise explicit assistance to students in deciphering text, other than to mention that decoding skills are addressed as needed:
In the upper grades, by this grade, they need to be able to decode words like 'reclamation', and you need these kids to reach a stage where they can go to high school and read this, because they are all going to read the same text.
Word building skills were addressed explicitly in the spelling program but regular instruction within reading lessons was not undertaken. In an effort to overcome the negative self-concepts of poorer readers, which Q believes were a result of problems in decoding and reading skills, mixed ability groups are used. Q believes that these groups allow a greater focus on meaning and a lesser focus on code breaker elements. Q considers that in this context poor readers' decoding of text will improve because they are able to view how the better readers in the group approach words. The use of small groups also allows each student to view the text as it is being read, therefore reinforcing the visual memory of words. Q views visual input in word recognition as important:
(I)f you're looking at some of those words on the page, I always hope that the next time they come across it they will remember it; whereas if you just hear it, visually it's not familiar.
Q restricted her comments about reading instruction in her classroom to specific reading lessons. It is not apparent from her comments whether the visual identification of symbols such as those found in information technology lessons is taught.

Promotion of 'Meaning Maker' practices

The opportunity for individuals to respond to texts is given a priority in Q's classroom. Again, the use of small groups allows a better chance for expression of thoughts and opinions than a whole class scenario. Q sees the opportunity to talk about a text as a necessary prerequisite for the development of student understanding. It can be seen that Q's approach to vocabulary study (that is, the teacher providing instances of the usage of a particular word in context in order to identify nuances) focusses on cultural understanding of words and texts rather than enquiry processes. Q's aim of moving Year 7 students past literal understanding of texts is also pertinent here. While meaning making is valued highly by Q, a variety of activities other than discussion and responses to questions is not featured.

Promotion of 'Text User' practices

An emphasis in Q's classroom is on enjoying reading and to this purpose a variety of narratives is employed. Some reading is undertaken in other genre to pursue the aims of expanding general knowledge and awareness of others people's perspectives.
I like to do, with Year 7, books where they learn - [especially] historical stuff because their knowledge of history and geography is just appalling ... I like books that take us further in our understanding ...
Expository texts are also included, along with their application to debating. Q did make reference to using non-fiction texts for note-taking but prefers the use of narratives in reading lessons.

Promotion of 'Text Analyst' practices

Luke and Freebody (2000, p. 82) define text analyst practices as 'the practices required to analyse, critique and second-guess texts.' In the transcripts from Q's interviews, there appears to be an emphasis on these practices in Q's classroom. Q points out that, by Year 7, students are generally good at literal comprehension of text, and so one of her aims in reading instruction is to extend comprehension abilities to inferential and critical capacities. Visual as well as written texts are employed:
We watched 'Gallipoli' ... trying to move the kids away from looking at the movie in terms of 'God this is boring! It's going on so there's not a lot of action;' to 'Well why did the director make those choices to do it that way? What messages were they trying to get across?'
The types of questions posed for group discussion or written response require statement and justification of opinions. The creation of 'combat reading' was in response to the need for students to justify their comments about text, rather than to demand acceptance through loudness. The identification of stereotypes in texts is also typical of analytic practices. When investigating stereotypes, Q includes analysis of characters, gender and plot within narratives. Students are required to relate how such depictions impact on their own lives. Debating comes under the umbrella of text analyst practices as does identification of author's purpose and decisions, both of which are apparent within Q's reading lessons.

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights the eclectic nature of one teacher's classroom practice and its relationship to student needs and teacher philosophy. Elements of Q's practice could be analysed to show a variety of skills-based, psycholinguistic and social views of reading applied in the classroom, with an emphasis on the latter two approaches. The lack of emphasis on development of specific reading skills was a response to the emphasis on this in earlier grades in the primary school, and in Q's mind as a counterbalance to the negative self-concepts of poorer readers developed over time from earlier instructional practices.

Affective development in reading is foremost in Q's pedagogical decisions. Q's personal passion for reading and her appreciation of reading as the skill to have culminate in a reading program aimed at developing students into appreciative readers. Q's instructional emphasis is on enjoyment of narratives and an ability to analyse texts through interaction with others around text, and by relating texts to everyday experiences. Appreciation and enjoyment of reading is seen to develop through engagement in the reading and meaning making process. Materials, interactions and activities are aimed at building confidence and knowledge in understanding of text, therefore allowing individuals to enjoy reading. Reading is seen by Q to be central to an individual's options in life:

I think children who are allowed to get through primary school without developing (a) an ability to read, and (b) an enjoyment of it are handicapped depending on what they want to do in life. They're handicapped because they are deprived of that pleasure. Now so long as you can teach them to read ... even if you haven't succeeded in getting them to enjoy it; you know that you've equipped them to ... be able to do whatever it is they want to do in life.
If one can accept this point of view, how unsettling is it to consider that so little assistance is given to the development of reading in the upper primary school. A strength of this research is how it has suggested further avenues for investigation of this topic. A clearer focus on Q's practice would be gained by observations of Q's classroom practices over a period of time to determine reading instruction that occurs not just in reading lessons but across the curriculum.

This study also provides a basis for comparison with the approaches of other teachers. Replication of this study with other teachers in the upper primary or middle years of schooling would provide greater understanding teachers' professional practice. Q's self identification as a lover of reading, and her consequent aim of making reading 'fun', poses the obvious question of how a teacher for whom reading is not such a passion may approach reading instruction. Assuming that there are teachers who fit this description, how would their aims and practices differ, if at all, from those of teacher Q? Even more fundamentally, is a love of reading 'caught' or 'taught'? Development of the affective domain of reading is an area of exploration that has not enjoyed the widespread attention that beginning reading or explicit versus implicit instruction have received. If a love or appreciation of reading is a necessary tool for life-long learning, how is it developed? Research into pedagogy and the affective domain of reading is thus a strong recommendation from this study.

The teaching of reading is of primary concern in educational settings. Given the emphasis on the application of reading skills for learning in the secondary school, and the lack of instruction in reading in that context, it is particularly important to understand the demands on reading instruct ion in the upper primary school and how these demands may be met. Identification of teaching practices based on experience and what 'works' is seen as an initial step in critically reflecting on instructional practice in an effort to develop improved teaching practice.

REFERENCES

Andrews, S 1992, 'A skills approach: Optimising initial reading instruction', in A Watson & A Badenhop (Eds), Prevention of reading failure, Ashton Scholastic, Sydney.

Anstey, M & Bull, G 1996, The literacy labyrinth, Prentice Hall, Sydney.

Beiger, GR & Gerlach, GJ 1996, Educational research: A Practical approach, Delmar Publishers, Melbourne.

Cairney, T, Buchanan, J, Sproats, E & Lowe, K 1998, 'Literacy in the transition years', The Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 98-117.

Chall, J 1992, 'The New Reading Debates: Evidence from science, art and ideology', Teachers College Record, vol. 94, no. 2, pp. 315-329.

Cortazzi, M 1993, Narrative Analysis, Falmer, London.

Dennett, S & Milburn, S 1999, Literacy beyond the early years: Victorian directions 1999 [Online], accessed 29 April 2001 [not found 27 Sep 2004]. http://www.sofweb.vic.edu.au/litfocus/PDF/Adelaide.pdf

Emmitt, M 1998, Understanding phonics and its role in literacy education [Online], accessed 5 December 2001 [verified 27 Sep 2004]. http://www.discover.tased.edu.au/english/Emmitt.htm

Gillham, B 2000, Case study research methods, Continuum, London.

Goetz, JP & LeCompte, MD 1984, Ethnography and qualitative design in educational research, Academic Press, Orlando.

Green, P 1998, 'The journey from primary to secondary school: The literacy-related demands in transition', The Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 118-134.

Hall, D & Hall, I 1996, Practical social research: Project work in the community, Macmillan, London.

Hammersley, M 1996, 'The relationship between qualitative and quantitative research: Paradigm loyalty versus methodological eclecticism', in JTE Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of qualitative research methods for psychology and the social sciences, (pp. 159-174), British Psychological Society, Leicester.

Harmon, JM 1998, 'Vocabulary teaching and learning in a seventh-grade literature-based classroom', Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, vol. 41, no. 7, pp. 518-530.

Harris, P, Turbill, J, Fitzsimmons, P & McKenzie, B 2001, Reading in the primary school years, Social Science Press, Katoomba.

Healy, A 2001, Teaching reading and writing in a multiliteracies context: Classroom practice, Post Pressed, Flaxton.

Hitchcock, G & Hughes, D 1989, Research and the teacher: A qualitative introduction to school-based research (2nd ed.), Routledge, London.

Indrisano, R, & Chall, JS, 1995, 'Literacy development', Journal of Education, vol. 177, no. 1, pp. 63-84.

Ivey, G 1999, 'Teaching struggling middle school readers', Education Digest, vol. 65, no. 2, pp. 60-66.

Ivey, G & Broaddus, K 2000, 'Tailoring the fit: Reading instruction and middle school readers', Reading Teacher, vol. 54, no. 1, pp. 68-79.

Katims, DS & Harris, S 1997, 'Improving the reading comprehension of middle school students in inclusive classrooms', Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, vol. 41, no. 2, pp. 116-126.

Kiefer, B 1994, 'The literature-based movement: Yesterday, today and tomorrow', Emergency Librarian, vol. 21, no. 5, pp. 8-14.

Loranger, AL 1999, 'The challenge of content area literacy: A middle school case study', Clearing House, vol. 72, no. 4, pp. 239-244.

Luke, A 1993, 'The social construction of literacy in the primary school', in L Unsworth (Ed.), Literacy Learning and Teaching, Macmillan Education Australia, Melbourne.

Luke A & Freebody, P 1997, 'Shaping the social practices of reading', in S Muspratt, A Luke & P Freebody (Eds), Constructing critical literacies: Teaching and learning textual practice, Hampton Press, Cresskill, New Jersey.

Luke, A & Freebody, P 1999, 'A map of possible practices: Further notes on the four resources model', Practically Primary, vol. 4, no. 2. [verified 27 Sep 2004] http://www.alea.edu.au/freebody.htm accessed May 8, 2001.

Luke A & Freebody P 2000, Literate futures: Report of the Literacy Review for Queensland State Schools, Queensland Government Printer, Brisbane.

Manning, M 1997, 'Demonstrating reading', Teaching PreK-8, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 95-97.

Meehan, P 1997, 'Beyond a chocolate crunch bar: A teacher examines her philosophy of teaching reading', Reading Teacher, vol. 51, no. 4, pp. 314-325.

Moss, B 1991, 'Promoting reading and writing in the middle-grade content-area classroom', Clearing House, vol. 65, no. 1, pp. 11-14.

Rees, D 1994, First steps: Reading developmental continuum, Longman Cheshire, Melbourne (for Education Department of Western Australia).

Rivalland, J 2000, Finding a balance for the year 2000 and beyond [Online], ALEA, available from: URL http://www.alea.edu.au/jriver.htm accessed 8 May 2001 [verified 27 Sep 2004].

Seidman, IE 1991, Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers in education and the social sciences, Teachers College Press, New York.

Ulichny P & Schoener, W 1996, 'Teacher-researcher collaboration from two perspectives', Harvard Educational Review, vol. 66, no. 3, pp. 496-524.

Vasquez, V 2001, 'Negotiating a critical literacy curriculum with young children', Research Bulletins Online, http://www.pdkintl.org/edres/resbul29 accessed 7 December 2001 [verified 27 Sep 2004].

Watson, A & Badenhop, A 1992, Prevention of reading failure, Ashton Scholastic, Sydney.

Weaver, C 1990, Understanding whole language: from principles to practice, Heinemann Educational, Portsmouth New Hampshire.

Weaver, C 1994 Reading process and practice: from socio-psycholinguistics to whole language (2nd ed.), Heinemann Educational, Portsmouth, New Hampshire.

Worthy, J 1998, 'On every page someone gets killed! Book conversations you don't hear in school', Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, vol. 41, no. 7, pp. 508-519.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to acknowledge 'Q' for her time and willing participation in this study. I also salute Associate Professors Michele Anstey and Geoff Bull, and Dr Peter Forlin for their valuable assistance and support in this research.

Author details: Ms Teresa Woolacott, Faculty of Education, University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba Qld 4350. Email: woolacot@usq.edu.au

Please cite as: Woolacott, T. (2002). A profile of the teaching of reading in an upper primary school classroom. Queensland Journal of Educational Research, 18(1), 82-103. http://education.curtin.edu.au/iier/qjer/qjer18/woolacott.html


[ Contents Vol 18, 2002 ] [ QJER Home ]
Created 12 Sep 2004. Last correction: 31 Dec 2004.
URL: http://education.curtin.edu.au/iier/qjer/qjer18/woolacott.html