© Center for New Literacies 2008 1 How the New Literacies in Middle Grades Program Supports Low-...

© Center for New Literacies 2008

1

How the New Literacies in Middle Grades Program

Supports Low-Performing Schools

22nd IRA World Congress in Reading

July 28-31, 2008

Paula Egelson, Ed.D. [email protected]

Mary Provost, Ed.D. [email protected]

Emily Skinner, Ed.D. [email protected]

Margaret Hagood, Ph.D. [email protected]

Charleston, South Carolina, USA


2

Overview of the Center• Partnership between the School of Education at the

College of Charleston and Charleston County School District, USA

• Funded by the South Carolina Commission of Higher Education for a 5-year period (began in 2006 and ends in 2011)– Designed to become a self-sustaining program

beginning in year six

• Located in Charleston, South Carolina,

USA


3

New Literacies Conception of “Text”

• Text includes both print and non-print texts

• Reading is much more than the ability to decode and to comprehend print in a linear fashion (Flood & Lapp, 1995)

• Literacy instruction must account for adolescents’ varying engagements with multiple texts


4

Re-Connecting with Adolescents

• Adolescents experience a disconnect between their out-of-school and in-school literacy practices

• Teachers should build upon students’ out-of-school literacy practices as cultural resources for in-school literacies (Morell, 2002; Skinner, 2006)


5

Investigating Students’ Literacies

• Strategies– Graffiti activity– Tote Bag– Popular culture survey– Literacy practices ethnography


6

Introduction of Graphic Novels


7

Technology

• Blogs

• Fanfiction

• Wikis

• Podcasts

• Digital Video (Movie Maker and Photo Story)


8

Program Goals

• Goal One focuses on Increasing teachers’ depth of knowledge and effectiveness in teaching New Literacies in Middle Grades.

• Goal Two focuses on Developing literacy-focused middle schools by creating a New Literacies in Middle Grades model that can be disseminated across the state to schools and colleges.

• Goal Three centers around Improving reading student achievement scores in targeted middle schools.

• Goal Four involves Encouraging the sharing of relevant research and research-based instructional practices across South Carolina for the improvement of middle school literacies.

This evaluation provides baseline and year one data onGoals One and Three.


9

Evaluation QuestionsTo assess Goal One,

the following evaluation questions were developed: • To what extent do middle school teachers participating in the New

Literacies in Middle Grades process increase their use of research-based reading instructional strategies in their classrooms?

• To what extent do teachers perceive uses of New Literacies in their own lives?

• To what extent are teachers accepting various strategies introduced during New Literacies in Middle Grades Institutes?

To assess Goal Three,the following evaluation question was developed:

• To what extent do middle school students whose teachers participate in the collective study group process improve their reading comprehension and vocabulary outcomes when compared to students whose teachers do not participate in the collective study group process?


10

Contexts

• Two southeastern urban middle schools (grades 6-8), Westview and Northside

• Student populations similar– 74% African American (compared to district 43%)

– 5% Hispanic (compared to district 3 %)

– 65% free lunch rate (compared to 44% district)

– 49 % reduced lunch rate (compared to 26% district)


11

• ELA, Social Studies, and Special Education teachers; Media Specialists

• 6 males, 22 females• 6 African American, 22 Caucasian• Educational levels: BA (18); MEd (4);

Masters + coursework (5); Doctorate (1)• Range of years taught: 1-over 26• Mean years taught: 10

Participants at Northside and Westview in Year 1 (2006-2007)


12

Instrumentation

• The Faculty Self-report Survey is an eleven-item survey designed to determine various demographic information about individual teachers. Questions included: grade(s) currently taught and the number of years teaching; individual licensure and certification; gender; ethnic identity; and highest level of educational attainment.

• The Teacher New Literacies Confidence Scale was designed to assess the percentage of time teachers reported they spent teaching specific literacy skills and resources, their confidence in their ability to teach middle school students these specific literacy skills and resources, and whether or not the specific literacy skill and resources were taught in their classroom.

• The Teacher Survey was designed to determine participants’ individual definitions for “reading,” “writing,” “text,” and “literacy.” In addition, participants were asked to list all the things they: read and write at school throughout the day; read and write outside of school; think their friends read and write; and the amount of time they spend reading and writing on a typical Friday.


13

Teacher Survey Results-Year 1

• Reading: definitions varied but the most common terms that were used were “decoding,“ “understanding,” “comprehension,” and “meaning.“

• Writing: definitions varied but the most common terms used were “thoughts“ or “ideas.”

• Text: definitions varied but the most common terms that were used were “words” and “write (written).”

• Literacy: definitions were varied but the most common terms that were used were “ability (able)“ and “understand(ing).”

• Reading and Writing at School: Participants listed all the things they read and write at school throughout the day. The top four reading materials read at school, were textbooks, emails, notes/letters/memos, and students work. The top three written items that were identified by over half of the respondents were lesson plans, emails, and notes/letters/memos.


14

• Reading and Writing Outside of School: Participants listed all the things they read and write outside of school. The top three reading materials read outside of school, were books (fiction, nonfiction, religious), emails, and magazines/newsletters. The only written item that was identified by over half of the respondents was email.

• What Friends Read and Write: Participants listed all the things they think their friends read and write. The top three reading materials they think their friends read, which were listed by over half of the respondents, were books (fiction, nonfiction, religious), emails, and maga-zines. The only written item that was identified by over half of the respondents was email.

• Time Spent Reading and Writing: three-fourths of the S2 teachers indicated that they read at least 90 minutes on Fridays compared to two-thirds of S1 teachers. In contrast, just over 50% of S2 teachers wrote for at least 90 minutes on Fridays. S1 teachers reported similar amounts of time writing as 53% indicated they spent at least 90 minutes writing on Fridays.

Teacher Survey Results-Year 1 continued


15

Year 1 Findings• Teachers and students at both schools viewed text in

school in a traditional and conventional manner, namely as print-based meant to be received and understood in social studies and language arts English classes.

• Teachers and students engaged a variety of new literacies both in- and out-of-school, but didn’t view text uses equally in terms of their literacy knowledge or usefulness in their lives, valuing print text as the one necessary for success in school.

• Most of teachers and students were interested in strategies utilizing new literacies to teach content, but their strategy implementation most often attended to the text participant resource of the Four Resources model.

• Teachers’ uses of students’ text interests from outside of school often pushed teachers outside their comfort levels, causing them to focus their instruction on traditional, autonomous print-based reading skills.


16

Four Resources Model (Freebody and Luke 1990)

Data AnalysisCode breaker: How do I crack this code?

Text participant: What does this text mean to me?

Explicit focus on reading print:•Emphasis on reading written text•Emphasis on decoding, spelling patterns, cueing systems

Explicit participation in the meanings of text:•Emphasis on understanding AND composing written, visual, spoken text•Relation between text and meaning within a culture made explicit•Culture (institutions, families, communities, government, etc.)


17

Four Resources Model (Freebody and Luke 1990)

Data AnalysisText user: What do I do with this text?

Text analyst: What does this text do to me?

Use texts functionally ACROSS social relations:•Emphasis on understanding AND composing written, visual, spoken text•Explicit connections made to the ways that texts are structured and read differently by cultural and social functions•Connections to meaning differences in- and outside of school

Critically analyze and transform texts: •Emphasis on understanding AND composing written, visual, spoken text

•Explicit understanding and acting on the knowledge that texts are not neutral,

•Descriptions that texts represent particular views and silence other points of view, influence people's ideas

•Focus given to text analysis of text designs and discourses

•Use of text critique and redesign to produce something hybrid or new


18

To what extent do middle school teachers participating in the New Literacies in Middle Grades process increase their use of research-based reading instructional strategies in their

classrooms?

Instructional Strategy

Westview Northside

Year 1 Year 2 Year 1 Year 2

“Code Breaker” 17% 18% 18% 19%

“Text Participant” 28% 35% 25% 33%

“Text User” 32% 25% 23% 27%

“Text Analyst” 11% 20% 24% 20%Key: Table uses percentages of instructional time Year 1=(2006-2007) Year 2=(2007-2008)


19

Participants at Northside and Westview in Year 2 (2007-2008)

• ELA, Social Studies, and Special Education teachers; Media Specialists

• 8 males; 22 females• 6 African American, 24 Caucasian• 20 23-34 years, 10 35-60 years• Educational levels: BA (19); MEd (4);

Masters + coursework (5); Doctorate (2)• Range of years taught: 1-over 26• Mean years taught: 4.1


20

Year 2 Findings• Teachers implemented a variety of new literacies strategies

presented at the institutes and also constructed their own new literacies strategies using new literacies methods and tools presented at the institutes.

• Teachers approached new literacies projects through focusing on a variety of literacy processes, skills, and strategies.

• Teachers most often implemented new literacies projects as schema activation to open a unit of study or as enrichment projects that took place after content had been covered.

• English language arts and social studies approached many of the new literacies projects as integrated projects.

• Some teachers reported that they integrated new literacies into their instruction on a daily basis beyond the requirement of their participation in our Center’s professional development.

• Teachers mostly focused their instruction on developing students as text participants and text users.


21

This presentation was produced under a grant from the South Carolina Commission on Higher Education

under the auspices of the EIA Teacher Education Centers of Excellence Grant Program (USA).

Website: http://www.cofc.edu/~newliteracies/index.html

Closing Remarks

© Center for New Literacies 2008 1 How the New Literacies in Middle Grades Program Supports Low-...

Documents

Transcript of © Center for New Literacies 2008 1 How the New Literacies in Middle Grades Program Supports Low-...