Year: 2009
Author: Cowey, Wendy, Dunn, Bruce, Wolgemuth, Jenni, Harper, Helen
Type of paper: Abstract refereed
Abstract:
Low literacy results for Indigenous students as reported, for example, in the 2008 National Assessment Program, are a cause for concern for all educators. That only 49.2% of Year 7 students in very remote schools across Australia reached benchmark levels in this assessment has grave implications for these students who are so far advanced in school years without acquiring even basic levels of literacy. Because learning the skills of literacy is such a fundamental part of participation in Australian society, adults without these skills are marginalised.
It is human nature (Garfinkel, 1984; Bruner, 1986) to search to explain why such situations exist in societies. In this case, the most obvious and publicly accepted reason for low literacy results for Indigenous students is school attendance.
There are other reasons commonly posited such as the non-English speaking background of the students, that they have been brought up in another culture, and so on, but the argument most evident at the moment is attendance.
It is such an obvious and seemingly reasonable accounting for lack of progress in literacy that, in some instances, welfare payments have been linked to whether or not families send their children to school. If they don't send their children to school, the argument goes, how can we teach them? Having accounted so reasonably for the status quo, all concerned citizens can feel at ease knowing that an untenable situation is under control.
In this paper, however, we argue that using attendance as an 'accounting' for low literacy results renders invisible the role of pedagogy in student achievement. By placing blame on parents for their children's poor literacy achievement this entire group of students are positioned as 'other' to the normal, reasonable scheme of things. The marginalisation of this entire group of students is thus perceived as excusable.
We will argue therefore, that pedagogy is more important than attendance. We discuss data collected by the National Accelerated Literacy Program that have found a very weak correlation between attendance and literacy achievement. In fact, there are students in our schools whose attendance is extremely regular but whose literacy results are still distressingly poor.
We will then make visible what has been rendered largely invisible in the argument about low literacy results and discuss what is possible when good pedagogy such as that used in Accelerated Literacy teaching is employed by competent teachers.
This paper will be presented as part of Symposium 10, HAR091090 Getting education to work for marginalised students and in marginal contexts: what does it actually take?
Key Phrase: Indigenous Education
It is human nature (Garfinkel, 1984; Bruner, 1986) to search to explain why such situations exist in societies. In this case, the most obvious and publicly accepted reason for low literacy results for Indigenous students is school attendance.
There are other reasons commonly posited such as the non-English speaking background of the students, that they have been brought up in another culture, and so on, but the argument most evident at the moment is attendance.
It is such an obvious and seemingly reasonable accounting for lack of progress in literacy that, in some instances, welfare payments have been linked to whether or not families send their children to school. If they don't send their children to school, the argument goes, how can we teach them? Having accounted so reasonably for the status quo, all concerned citizens can feel at ease knowing that an untenable situation is under control.
In this paper, however, we argue that using attendance as an 'accounting' for low literacy results renders invisible the role of pedagogy in student achievement. By placing blame on parents for their children's poor literacy achievement this entire group of students are positioned as 'other' to the normal, reasonable scheme of things. The marginalisation of this entire group of students is thus perceived as excusable.
We will argue therefore, that pedagogy is more important than attendance. We discuss data collected by the National Accelerated Literacy Program that have found a very weak correlation between attendance and literacy achievement. In fact, there are students in our schools whose attendance is extremely regular but whose literacy results are still distressingly poor.
We will then make visible what has been rendered largely invisible in the argument about low literacy results and discuss what is possible when good pedagogy such as that used in Accelerated Literacy teaching is employed by competent teachers.
This paper will be presented as part of Symposium 10, HAR091090 Getting education to work for marginalised students and in marginal contexts: what does it actually take?
Key Phrase: Indigenous Education