Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

International Evidence for the Teaching of Reading in New Zealand

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Third International Handbook of Globalisation, Education and Policy Research

  • 2098 Accesses

Abstract

Since 2000 average achievement of New Zealand students in reading has declined, based on international measures, and the range of achievement is among the greatest in the OECD. Reasons for the trend are offered in the research literature, and in media commentary, with advocates often citing evidence from the “Science of Reading” in support of a more systematic approach to teaching phonological knowledge and skills in the early stages. This chapter reviews the international evidence about the teaching of reading in the English language, including recent influential reports and meta analyses. The findings of the review are applied to evaluate arguments for change to instructional approaches in New Zealand. This chapter demonstrates that early reading receives much research attention, but the later developments related to reading as a servant to learning across the curriculum, and in real life, are impoverished cousins. The chapter points to evidence in support of some potential changes. Intervention for early readers at risk is still needed, possibly more so than ever before. The position of Reading Recovery (RR) as the dominant provision is eroding as the proportion of schools running programmes declines. Most importantly the focus of instruction must remain on making meaning at all levels of learning to read, through exposing students to a range of rich texts. Improvements in PIRLS and PISA results will occur if students know more about the contexts used in the questions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 219.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 279.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 279.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Adams, M. J. (1998). The three-cueing system. In F. Lehr & J. Osborn (Eds.), Literacy for all issues in teaching and learning (pp. 73–99). New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Appleton-Dyer, S., Boswell, A., & Reynolds, J. (2019). Reading recovery evaluation: Report for the ministry of education. Wellington: Synergia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowers, J. S., & Bowers, P. N. (2017). Beyond phonics: the case for teaching children the logic of the English spelling system. Educational Psychologist, 52, 124–141. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2017.1288571.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowers, P. N., Kirby, J. R., & Deacon, S. H. (2010). The effects of morphological instruction on literacy skills: A systematic review of the literature. Review of Educational Research, 80, 144–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buckingham, J. (2020). Systematic phonics instruction belongs in evidence-based reading programs: A response to Bowers. The Educational and Developmental Psychologist, First view online.https://doi.org/10.1017/edp.2020.12.

  • Buckingham, J., Wheldall, R., & Wheldall, K. (2019). Systematic and explicit phonics instruction: A scientific, evidence-based approach to teaching the alphabetic principle. In R. Cox, S. Feez, & L. Beveridge (Eds.), The alphabetic principle and beyond (pp. 49–67). Newtown: Primary English Teaching Association Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Castles, A., Rastle, K., & Nation, K. (2018). Ending the reading wars: Reading acquisition from novice to expert. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 19(1), 5–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cervetti, G. N., Pearson, P. D., Palinscar, A. S., Afflerbach, P., Kendeou, P., Biancarosa, G., Higgs, J., Fitzgerald, M. S., & Berman, A. (2020). How the reading for understanding initiative’s research complicates the simple view of reading invoked in the science of reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 55(S1), 161–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chamberlain, M. (2019). PIRLS 2016: Reading literacy and the classroom. Wellington: Ministry of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chapman, J., & Arrow, A. W. (2017). Phonics use, teachers’ knowledge of language constructs, and teachers’ literacy practices in New Zealand: Prospects for struggling readers in a predominantly whole language instructional system. Presentation at the annual meeting of the International Academy for Research in Learning Disabilities. University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia, July 3–5, 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chapman, J., Greaney, K., & Tunmer, W. (2007). How well is reading recovery really working in New Zealand? New Zealand Journal of Education Studies, 42(1 and 2), 17–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clay, M. M. (1979). Reading: The patterning of complex behaviour. Auckland: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clay, M. (1985). The early detection of reading difficulties (3rd ed.). (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED263529).

    Google Scholar 

  • Clay, M. M. (1998). An observation survey of early literacy achievement. Auckland: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coe, R. (2002), It’s the effect size, stupid: What effect size is and why it is important. Paper presented at the British Educational Research Association Conference, Exeter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dehaene, S., & Cohen, L. (2011). The unique role of the visual form area in reading. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15(6), 254–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Education Review Office. (2018). Teaching strategies and approaches that work: Keeping children engaged and achieving in reading. Wellington: Education Review Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gabriel, R. (2020). The future of the science of reading. The Reading Teacher, 74(1), 11–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodwin, A. P., & Ahn, S. (2013). A meta-analysis of morphological interventions in English: Effects on literacy outcomes for school-age children. Scientific Studies of Reading, 17, 257–285. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2012.689791.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gough, P. B., & Tunmer, W. E. (1986). Decoding, reading, and reading disability. Remedial and Special Education, 7, 6–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, M. S., & Burns, M. K. (2018). Meta-analysis of targeted small-group reading interventions. Journal of School Psychology, 66(2018), 54–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hempenstall, K. (2003). The three-cueing system: Trojan horse? Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties, 8(2), 15–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hempenstall, K. (2016). Read about it: Scientific evidence for effective teaching of reading. Report 11, The Centre for Independent Studies, Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hruby, G. C., & Goswami, U. (2011). Neuroscience and reading: A review for reading education researchers. Reading Research Quarterly, 46(2), 156–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huber, E., Donnelly, P. M., Rokem, A., & Yeatman, J. D. (2018). Rapid and widespread white matter plasticity during an intensive reading intervention. Nature Communications, 9(1), 2260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, R., & Limbrick, L. (2013). Can gains from early literacy interventions be sustained? The case of Reading Recovery. Journal of Research in Reading, 37(1), 102–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johansson, S. (2020). Analysing the (mis)use and consequences of international large-scale assessments. In J. Zajda (Ed.), Globalisation, ideology and education reforms: Emerging paradigms. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnston, R., & Watson, J. (2005). The effects of synthetic phonics teaching of reading and spelling attainment: A seven year longitudinal study. Retrieved 10 December 2006, from http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/36496/0023582.pdf

  • Konza, D. (2014). Teaching reading: Why the “Fab Five” should be the “Big Six”. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 39(12) Retrieved from http://ro.ecu.edu.au/ajte/vol39/iss12/10.

  • Lifting Literacy Aotearoa (2020). Experts divided over best way to teach Kiwi children to read. Retrieved from: https://www.facebook.com/LiftingLiteracyAotearoa/

  • May, H., Sirinides, P., Gray, A., & Goldsworthy, H. (2016). Reading recovery: An evaluation of the four-year i3 scale-up. Philadelphia: Consortium for Policy Research in Education.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • McDowall, S. (2007). The case for reading recovery. New Zealand Education Review, 12(48), 8.

    Google Scholar 

  • McNaughton, S. (2020). The literacy landscape in Aotearoa New Zealand: What we know, what needs fixing and what we should prioritise. Auckland: Office of Prime Minister’s Chief Science Adviser. Retrieved 30 September, 2020, from: https://auckland.figshare.com/articles/report/The_Literacy_Landscape_in_Aotearoa_New_Zealand_What_we_know_what_needs_fixing_what_we_should_prioritise_Report/12749321

  • Medina, E., & McGregor, A. (2019). PISA2018: Reading in New Zealand (Reading Achievement and experiences of 15-year-olds). Wellington: Ministry of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Melby-Lervåg, M., Lyster, S.-A. H., & Hulme, C. (2012). Phonological skills and their role in learning to read: A metaanalytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 138, 322–352. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026744.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Education. (2003). Progress in international reading literacy study: A summary of New Zealand’s year 5 student achievement 2001. Wellington: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction (National Institute of Health Pub. No. 00-4769). Washington, DC: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • New Zealand Educational Institute (NZEI). (1970). Reading units for junior school. Wellington: NZEI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicholas, K., & Parkhurst, F. (2014). Is Reading Recovery sustainable two to four years after discontinuation? International Journal of Primary, Elementary, and Early Years Education, 45(2), 663–672.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poldrack, R. A., & Farah, M. J. (2015). Progress and challenges in probing the human brain. Nature, 526(7573), 371–379. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature15692.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rose, J. (2006). Independent review of the teaching of early reading. Nottingham: DfES Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rowe, K. J. (Chair) (2005). Teaching reading literature review: A review of the evidence-based research literature on approaches to the teaching of literacy, particularly those that are effective in assisting students with reading difficulties. A report of the Committee for the National Inquiry into the Teaching of Literacy. Canberra, ACT: Australian Government Department of Education, Science and Training. Available for download at http://www.dest.gov.au/nitl/report.htm.

  • Rowe, K. J. (2006). Effective teaching practices for students with and without learning difficulties: Constructivism as a legitimate theory of learning AND of teaching? Background paper to keynote address presented at the NSW DET Office of Schools Portfolio Forum, Wilkins Gallery, Sydney, 14 July 2006. Available at: http://www.acer.edu.au/research/programs/learningprocess.html

  • Scammacca, N. K., Roberts, G., Vaughn, S., & Stuebing, K. K. (2015). A meta-analysis of interventions for struggling readers in grades 4–12: 1980–2011. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 48, 369–390. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219413504995.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shanahan, T. (2004). Critiques of the national reading panel report: Their implications for research, policy and practice. In P. McCardle & V. Chhabra (Eds.), Voice of evidence in reading research (pp. 235–265). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shannahan, T. (2019). Improving reading comprehension in the primary grades. Dublin: National Council for Curriculum and Assessment. Accessed from: https://ncca.ie/media/4018/improving-reading-comprehension-in-the-primary-classes-professor-timothy-shanahan-university-of-illinois-at-chicago.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaywitz, S. E., & Shaywitz, B. A. (2004). Reading disability and the brain: What research says about reading. Educational Leadership, 61(6), 6–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaywitz, B., & Shaywitz, S. (2007). What neuroscience really tells us about reading instruction: A response to Judy Willis. Educational Leadership, 64(5), 74–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slavin, R. E. (1986). Best-evidence synthesis: An alternative to meta-analytic and traditional reviews. Educational Researcher, 15(9), 5–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slavin, R. E. (2018). John Hattie is wrong.https://robertslavinsblog.wordpress.com/2018/06/21/john-hattie-is-wrong/

  • Slavin, R. E., Lake, C., Chambers, B., Cheung, A., & Davis, S. (2009). Effective reading programs for the elementary grades: A best-evidence synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 79, 1391–1466. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654309341374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slavin, R. E., Lake, C., Davis, S., & Madden, N. A. (2011). Effective programs for struggling readers: A best-evidence synthesis. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University, Center for DataDriven Reform in Education. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2010.07.002.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, S. L., Goodman, K. S., & Paulson, E. J. (2009). Brain research and reading: How emerging concepts in neuroscience support a meaning construction view of the reading process. Educational Research and Review, 4(2), 21–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, J. S. H., Rastle, K., & Davis, M. H. (2013). Can cognitive models explain brain activation during word and pseudoword reading? A meta-analysis of 36 neuroimaging studies. Psychological Bulletin, 139, 766–791. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Torgerson, C., Brooks, G., Gascoine, L. & Higgins, S. (2018). Phonics: Reading policy and the evidence of effectiveness from a systematic ‘tertiary’ review. Research Papers in Education. Retrieved from: doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/02671522.2017.1420816.

  • Tunmer, W. E., Chapman, J. W., Greaney, K. T., Prochnow, J. E., & Arrow, A. W. (2013). Reading recovery and the failure of the national literacy strategy. Learning Difficulties Australia, 45(3), 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vandermosten, M., Hoeft, F., & Norton, E. S. (2016). Integrating MRI brain imaging studies of pre-reading children with current theories of developmental dyslexia: a review and quantitative meta-analysis. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 10, 155–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2016.06.007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wanzek, J., Stevens, E. A., Williams, K. J., Scammacca, N., Vaughn, S., & Sargent, K. (2018). Current evidence on the effects of intensive early reading interventions. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 51(6), 612–624. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219418775110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Willingham, D. T. (2006). The effectiveness of brief instruction in reading comprehension strategies (pp. 39–45). Winter: American Educator.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolgemuth, J. R., Hicks, T., & Agosto, V. (2017). Unpacking assumptions in research synthesis: A Critical construct synthesis approach. Educational Researcher, 46(3), 131–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, V. (2020). Crisis in economic theory and the implications for PISA derived educational policy. In J. Zajda (Ed.), Globalisation, ideology and education reforms (pp. 43–56). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Wyse, D., & Styles, M. (2007). Synthetic phonics and the teaching of reading: The debate surrounding England’s Rose report. Literacy, 41, 35–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yatvin, J. (2002). Babes in the Woods: The Wanderings of the National Reading Panel. Phi Delta Kappan, 83(5), 364–369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Australian Catholic University, Melbourne, Australia

    Vince Wright

Authors
  1. Vince Wright
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Australian Catholic University, Melbourne Campus, Melbourne, Australia

    Joseph Zajda

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Wright, V. (2021). International Evidence for the Teaching of Reading in New Zealand. In: Zajda, J. (eds) Third International Handbook of Globalisation, Education and Policy Research. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-66003-1_43

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-66003-1_43

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-66002-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-66003-1

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation