Advertisement

Reading and Writing

, Volume 29, Issue 5, pp 981–1011 | Cite as

Mapping the landscape of writing instruction in New Zealand primary school classrooms

  • Judy M. Parr
  • Rebecca Jesson
Article

Abstract

Writing instruction in New Zealand occurs in a context with potential for variability in curriculum and delivery. The national curriculum is broad; self governing schools are to interpret and apply as appropriate to their local context. There are no mandated tests, nor external examinations until the last three years of school. Schools report to the Ministry about achievement in Years 1–8 against national standards in writing, based on overall teacher judgements. The nature of this context supports the notion of drawing on several sources to describe the current landscape of writing instruction: policy documents, specifically the curriculum and standards; national tools and resources for professional learning; the limited existing research base relating to writing in New Zealand, and a study designed to extend this latter body of work by surveying teachers about their practices. The existing research largely concerns the practices of exemplary teachers or relates to investigating the effects of professional development interventions. The survey reported provides the most direct evidence of actual practice. Survey responses (N = 118) came from, on average, moderately experienced teachers who reported a relatively high level of confidence regarding aspects of teaching writing. Results suggest that surveyed teachers reflected the themes identified in the New Zealand teacher based and intervention research, which in turn reflected policy initiatives. The combined evidence indicates the influence of the ‘teaching as inquiry’ approach on writing pedagogy.

Keywords

Writing instruction primary school Teaching as inquiry New Zealand 

References

  1. Alliance for Excellent Education. (2007). Making writing instruction a priority in America’s middle and high schools. Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
  2. Alton-Lee, A. (2003). Quality teaching for diverse students in school: Best evidence synthesis. Wellington: Ministry of Education.Google Scholar
  3. Applebee, A. N., & Langer, J. A. (2011). A snapshot of writing instruction in middle schools and high schools. English Journal, 100(6), 14–27.Google Scholar
  4. Biancarosa, G., & Snow, C. E. (2004). Reading next: A vision for action and research in middle and high school literacy: A report from the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education.Google Scholar
  5. Chamberlain, M., & Ministry of Education. (2013). PIRLS 2010/11 in New Zealand: An overview of findings from the third cycle of the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study. Wellington: Ministry of Education.Google Scholar
  6. Clay, M. M. (1998). By different paths to common outcomes. York: Stenhouse.Google Scholar
  7. Clay, M. (2010). How very young children explore writing (Pathways to early literacy series. Discoveries in writing and reading). Rosedale, North Shore: Heinemann.Google Scholar
  8. Cutler, L., & Graham, S. (2008). Primary grade writing instruction: A national survey. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 909–919.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dix, S., & Cawkwell, G. (2011). The influence of peer group response: Building a teacher and student expertise in the writing classroom. English Teaching: Practice & Critique, 10(4), 41–57.Google Scholar
  10. Fisher, R., Myhill, D., & Twist, L. (2011) Evaluation of every child a writer report 2: Teaching and writing in ECaW classes. University of Exeter and National Foundation for Educational Research. DfE RR108b.Google Scholar
  11. Gadd, M. (2014). What is critical in the effective teaching of writing? A study of the classroom practice of some Year 58 teachers in the New Zealand context. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Auckland.Google Scholar
  12. Gilbert, J., & Graham, S. (2010). Teaching writing to elementary students in grades 4–6: A national survey. Elementary School Journal, 110(4), 494–518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Glasswell, K. (2000). The patterning of difference: Teachers and children constructing development in writing. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Auckland.Google Scholar
  14. Glasswell, K., & Parr, J. M. (2009). Teachable moments: Linking assessment and teaching in talk around writing. Language Arts, 86, 352–361.Google Scholar
  15. Glasswell, K., Parr, J. M., & McNaughton, S. (2003a). Four ways to work against yourself when conferencing struggling writers. Language Arts, 80, 291–298.Google Scholar
  16. Glasswell, K., Parr, J. M., & McNaughton, S. (2003b). Working with William: Teaching, learning and the joint construction of a poor writer. The Reading Teacher, 56, 494–500.Google Scholar
  17. Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007). Writing next: Effective strategies to improve writing of adolescents in middle and high schools. New York: Carnegie Corporation of New York.Google Scholar
  18. Jesson, R. (2010). Intertextuality as a conceptual tool for the teaching of writing: Designing professional development that will transfer. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Auckland.Google Scholar
  19. Jesson, R. N., & Cockle, V. (2014). The opportunities to build on existing expertise in writing classrooms: a study of writing lessons in New Zealand primary schools. Education 3-13, 1-13. doi: 10.1080/03004279.2014.923479
  20. Jesson, R., McNaughton, S., & Parr, J. M. (2011). Drawing on intertextuality in culturally diverse classrooms: Implications for transfer of literacy knowledge. English Teaching: Practice & Critique, 10(2), 65–77.Google Scholar
  21. Jesson, R., McNaughton, S., & Wilson, A. (2015). Raising literacy levels using digital learning: A design-based approach in New Zealand. Curriculum Journal, 26(2), 198–223. doi: 10.1080/09585176.2015.1045535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kiuhara, S. A., Graham, S., & Hawken, L. S. (2009). Teaching writing to high school students: A national survey. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 136–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lacina, J., & Block, C. C. (2012). Progressive writing instruction: Empowering school leaders and teachers. Voices from the Middle, 19(3), 10–17.Google Scholar
  24. Lipson, M., Mosenthal, J., Daniels, P., & Woodside-Jiron, H. (2000). Process writing in the classrooms of eleven fifth grade teachers with different orientations to teaching and learning. Elementary School Journal, 10, 209–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Meissel, K. (2014). Quantitative analysis selection in education: Potential impacts on researchers’ conclusions. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Auckland.Google Scholar
  26. Ministry of Education. (2007). The New Zealand curriculum. Wellington: Learning Media.Google Scholar
  27. Ministry of Education. (2009). The New Zealand curriculum reading and writing standards for Years 1–8. Wellington: Learning Media.Google Scholar
  28. Ministry of Education. (2010). The Literacy Learning Progressions: Meeting the reading and writing demands of the curriculum. Wellington: Learning Media.Google Scholar
  29. Ministry of Education and New Zealand Council for Educational Research. (2012). e-asTTle: Writing (revised). Retrieved from http://e-asTTlle.tki.org.nz/user-manuals
  30. Ministry of Education and the University of Auckland. (2004). Assessment tools for teaching and learning: asTTle. Wellington: Ministry of Education.Google Scholar
  31. Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Minnich, C. A., Drucker, K. T., & Ragan, M. A. (Eds.). (2012). PIRLS 2011 encyclopedia: Education policy and curriculum in reading (Vol. 1, 2). Chestnut Hill, MA: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College.Google Scholar
  32. National Center for Education Statistics. (2012). The nation’s report card: Writing 2011. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pdf/main2011/2012470.pdf
  33. National Commission on Writing in America’s School and Colleges. (2003). The neglected “R”: The need for a writing revolution. Retrieved from http://www.nwp.org/cs/public/print/resource/2432
  34. Norman, D. (1988). The psychology of everyday things. New York, NY: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  35. Nye, B., Konstantopoulos, S., & Hedges, L. (2004). How large are teacher effects? Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 26(3), 237–257. doi: 10.3102/01623737026003237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Parr, J. M. (2011). Repertoires to scaffold teacher learning and practice in assessment of writing. Assessing Writing, 16, 32–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Parr, J. M., & McNaughton, S. (2014). Making connections: The nature and occurrence of links in literacy teaching and learning. Australian Journal of Language & Literacy, 37(3), 141–150. Google Scholar
  38. Parr, J. M., Glasswell, K., & Aikman, M. (2007a). Supporting teacher learning and informed practice in writing through assessment tools for teaching and learning. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 35, 69–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Parr, J. M., & Limbrick, E. (2010). Contextualising practice: Hallmarks of effective teachers of writing. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26, 583–590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Parr, J. M., & Timperley, H. (2010). Feedback to writing, assessment for teaching and learning and student progress. Assessing Writing, 15, 68–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Parr, J. M., Timperley, H., Reddish, P., Jesson, R., & Adams, R. (2007b). Literacy professional development project: Identifying effective teaching and professional development practices for enhanced student learning. Report to Learning Media and the Ministry of Education. Auckland, NZ: UniServices, University of AucklandGoogle Scholar
  42. Poskitt, J., & Taylor, K. (2008). National Education Findings of Assess to Learn (AtoL) Wellington, NZ: Ministry of Education. Retrieved from http://www.educationcounts.govt.nz/publications/schooling/27968/27984
  43. Pressley, M., Gaskins, I., Solic, K., & Collins, S. (2006). A portrait of Benchmark High School: How a school produces high achievement in students who previously failed. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 282–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Puranik, C., Al Otaiba, S., Sidler, J., & Greulich, L. (2014). Exploring the amount and type of writing instruction during language arts instruction in kindergarten classrooms. Reading & Writing, 27(2), 213–236. doi: 10.1007/s11145-013-9441-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Si’ilata, R. (2014). Va’a Tele: Pasifika learners riding the success wave on linguistically and culturally responsive pedagogies. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Auckland.Google Scholar
  46. Timperley, H. S., & Parr, J. M. (2009). What is this lesson about? Instructional processes and student understandings in the writing classroom. Curriculum Journal, 20(43–60), 2009.Google Scholar
  47. Timperley, H., Parr, J. M., & Meissel, K. (2010). Making a difference to student achievement in literacy: Final research report on the Literacy Professional Development Project. Report to Learning Media and the Ministry of Education. Auckland, NZ: UniServices, University of Auckland.Google Scholar
  48. United Kingdom Department for Education. (2012). The research evidence on writing. Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-research-evidence-on-“writing”
  49. Ward, R., & Dix, S. (2004). Highlighting children’s awareness of their texts through talk. SET: Research Information for Teachers, 1, 1–11Google Scholar
  50. Wray, D., Medwell, J., Fox, R., & Poulson, L. (2000). The teaching practices of effective teachers of literacy. Educational Review, 52, 75–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Curriculum and Pedagogy, Faculty of Education and Social WorkThe University of AucklandAucklandNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations