THE APPROACHES THAT FOUNDATION PHASE GRADE 3 TEACHERS USE TO PROMOTE EFFECTIVE LITERACY TEACHING: A CASE STUDY

0
360

ABSTRACT

The changing role of literacy in primary education, with its emphasis on the acknowledgement of the learner’s values, beliefs, culture, background and language is the focus of this study.

The research was concerned with understanding the literacy practices of Foundation Phase Grade 3 teachers who are able to intentionally promote and mediate literacy acquisition among their learners. A qualitative design was used to describe the approaches of effective literacy teachers.

The research study discovered that while the teachers made use of a number of teaching methods that underpinned a de-contextualised and constructivist approach, a socio-cultural approach to literacy was lacking. The results call for a broadening of the definition of literacy; one that acknowledges the socio-cultural background of the learners in developing a literacy disposition that prepares learners for a changing world.

KEY CONCEPTS

Effective literacy teacher, literacy identity, literacy as socially situated, socio-cultural theory, socio- constructivist theory, multiliteracies, scaffolding, strategies, Luke and Freebody’s four-resources model.

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 Table of Classroom Observations…………………………………………………………………….. 72

Table 2 Literacy teaching as observed…………………………………………………………………………. 83

Table 3 Theories of learning as observed……………………………………………………………………… 85

Table 4 Approaches and practices as observed…………………………………………………………….. 86

Table 5 Effective characteristics as observed……………………………………………………………….. 88

Table 6 Definition of literacy teaching as recorded…………………………………………………………. 90

Table 7 The theories of learning as recorded…………………………………………………………………. 93

Table 8 Approaches and practices as recorded…………………………………………………………….. 94

Table 9 Grade 3 teachers’ characteristics as recorded…………………………………………………… 95

Table 10 Literacy teaching in the written work……………………………………………………………….. 97

Table 11 Theories of learning in learners’ written work……………………………………………………. 98

Table 12 Approaches and practises in learners’ written work…………………………………………. 100

Table 13 Characteristics of Grade 3 teachers’ in learners’ written work………………………….. 100

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

ANCAfrican National Congress
C2005Curriculum 2005
DoEDepartment of Education
FFLCFoundations for Learning Campaign
FPFoundation Phase
ICTInformation Communication Technology
LOLTLanguage of Learning and Teaching
MOIMedium of Instruction
MTMother Tongue
NLSNew Literacy Studies
OBEOutcomes Based Education
OHPOverhead Projector
PIRLProgress in International Reading Literacy
QIDS-UPQuality Improvement Development Support and Upliftment Programme
RNCSRevised National Curriculum Statement
SASouth Africa
WCEDWestern Cape Education Department

TABLE                                             OF                                              CONTENTS DECLARATION ii

DEDICATION………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS……………………………………………………………………………………………………… iv

ABSTRACT……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… v

KEY CONCEPTS……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. v

LIST OF TABLES……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. vi

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS……………………………………………………………………………………………………. vii

CHAPTER 1……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 13

ORIENTATION…………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 13

  1. Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………………. 13
    1. Research problem……………………………………………………………………………………… 19
    1. Aim of the research……………………………………………………………………………………. 20
    1. Motivation for the research…………………………………………………………………………. 21
    1. Research design and methodology………………………………………………………………. 22
      1. Literature study………………………………………………………………………………………. 22
      1. Empirical investigation…………………………………………………………………………….. 23
        1. Pilot study……………………………………………………………………………………….. 23
        1. Sampling and selection of participants………………………………………………… 23
        1. Data collection methods……………………………………………………………………. 24
        1. Data analysis…………………………………………………………………………………… 25
        1. Reliability and validity……………………………………………………………………….. 25
    1. Explanation of concepts……………………………………………………………………………… 25
      1. Effective literacy teacher………………………………………………………………………… 25
      1. Literacy identity………………………………………………………………………………………. 26
      1. Literacy as socially situated practice…………………………………………………………. 26
      1. Multiliteracies…………………………………………………………………………………………. 26
      1. Scaffolding…………………………………………………………………………………………….. 26
    1. Limitations of the study……………………………………………………………………………….. 26
    1. Outline of the study……………………………………………………………………………………. 27
    1. Summary…………………………………………………………………………………………………. 27

CHAPTER 2……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 28

LITERATURE REVIEW………………………………………………………………………………………………… 28

CHAPTER 3……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 51

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE EFFECTIVE LITERACY TEACHER………………………………………. 51

3.2 3.     Instruction in social interaction and creating collaborative opportunities for learning 55

3.2.4.     Integration of transmission and constructivist models………………………………….. 56

CHAPTER 4……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 65

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY………………………………………………………………….. 65

CHAPTER 5……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 77

PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS………………………………………………………… 77

CHAPTER 6……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 109

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS…………………………………………………………………………….. 109

Appendixes……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 118

Appendix 1: Request for official approval to conduct research…………………………………… 119

Appendix 2: Description of Research Project…………………………………………………………… 120

Appendix 3:  Official letter of approval to conduct research……………………………………….. 121

Appendix 4.1 (A) Teacher 1 Observation 1……………………………………………………………… 122

Appendix 4.1 (B) Teacher 1 Observation 2……………………………………………………………… 128

Appendix 4.1 (C) Teacher 1 Observation 3……………………………………………………………… 130

Appendix 4.2 (A) Teacher 2 Observation 1……………………………………………………………… 132

Appendix 4.2 (B) Teacher 2 Observation 2……………………………………………………………… 134

Appendix 4.2 (C) Teacher 2 Observation 3……………………………………………………………… 135

Appendix 4.3 (A) Teacher 3 Observation 1……………………………………………………………… 136

Appendix 4.3 (B) Teacher 3 Observation 2……………………………………………………………… 138

Appendix 5: Semi-structured Interview Questions…………………………………………………….. 139

Appendix 6:  Summary of Teachers responses to Interview………………………………………. 140

Appendix 6.1: Teacher 1 response to semi structured interview…………………………………. 146

Appendix 6.2 Teacher 2 response to semi-structured interview………………………………….. 149

Appendix 6.3 Teacher 3 response to semi-structured interview………………………………….. 152

Appendix 7.1 Written Work of Teacher 1…………………………………………………………………. 155

Appendix 7.2 Written Work of Teacher 2…………………………………………………………………. 156

Appendix 7.3 Written Work of Teacher 4…………………………………………………………………. 157

References……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 158

CHAPTER 1 ORIENTATION

1.      Introduction

Since the launch of Curriculum 2005 in March 1997, the media has continued to publish and print a dismal picture of the low literacy levels in the Foundation Phase (FP) and the poor Matric pass rates. The public’s dissatisfaction with schooling is fierce, because of its inability to alter the dismal results. Numerous newspaper articles (The Times 2007; Business Day 2007a; Cape Times 2008) calling for the improvement of the teaching of literacy and numeracy continue to make the headlines. Schooling is held responsible for the poor literacy levels because the public links poor literacy levels with the development of behavioural and emotional problems. The expectation is that it is the school’s responsibility to produce excellent literacy levels so that in turn excellent, obedient citizens who are law-abiding are produced. This, of course, according to the media articles, is not happening (Mail and Guardian 2007:17; Cape Times 2008:5; Sunday Times 2009:9), and schooling is being held responsible for all social ills.

Universities continue to complain about Grade 12 students who are entering tertiary education and are ill-prepared because they are unable to cope with the proficiency tests on entry to university. Prof Brian O’Connell, Vice-Chancellor of the University of the Western Cape, in Business Day (2010:4) stated “We have a national problem (regarding) the quality of our school leavers. It is a deep problem…” He also continued to report the fact that he was aware that South Africa’s school learners were not without talent, but that the problem was that they were not competent because they were not taught properly at school. He did not elaborate on his observation of ‘not taught properly’. In the same article, Jody Cedras, from the Department of Higher Education and Training, attributes socio-economic status and race to what he calls the “large and growing” gaps in education at school. From the daily media reports about poor literacy levels in our country, there is a burning need to discover who is promoting and effectively increasing the literacy levels of our  Foundation  Phase(FP) learners and how and where these best practices can be held up as positive examples of being ‘taught properly’.

With the implementation of Outcomes Based Education (OBE) and the introduction of the new curriculum in 1997 the teachers, after workshops and training sessions, were expected to demonstrate the use of new OBE strategies, methods and techniques. Sadly, the expectations of the dramatic changes have not been fulfilled. Of course the emphasis on assessment and the completion of Outcomes Based Education Schedules have dampened the spontaneity and enthusiasm of many of the teachers. The issue of translating curriculum into good classroom practice is a problem.

The African National Congress (ANC) Polokwane Conference of 2007 declared that education and health should be the two key priorities of the ANC for the next five years, in order to improve the living standards of the workers and the poor, according to Blade Nzimande (a member of the ANC’s National Executive Committee) (Argus 2008:5). This Conference also acknowledged that more should have been invested in education during the first decade of our democracy, because there was a need now to improve the quality of education in our schools, by focussing on the effective teaching of literacy and numeracy in the primary schools.

Tests such as the Progress in International Reading Literacy (PIRL) reported that more than three quarters of South African Grade 5 learners had failed to master basic reading skills and achieved the lowest scores in a literacy study of Grade 4 and 5 learners in 39 countries (Cape Argus 2007:3). Sarah Howie, Director for the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement, commented “What we need is proper implementation of the curriculum in its current form” (Business Day 2007b:3). The following media: Cape Times, Cape Argus and Business Day on the 30 November 2007 all reported on the poor results, both nationally and internationally, showing that our children lag behind their peers in other countries, including developing countries such as in Sub Saharan Africa.

The Department of Education (DoE) over the last two or three years has introduced interventions such as the Foundations for Learning Campaign (FFLC); the Dinaledi Schools programme to promote mathematics, science and technology education; the Quality Improvement Development Support and Upliftment Programme (QIDS-UP), aimed at supporting learning, teaching and school leadership at 3 500 under-performing primary schools in poor areas; the introduction of a pre-school Grade R year for all five-year-olds, and various other initiatives, such as reading tool kits and packs of books, Drop All and Read Campaign and the Writing Project to improve reading and writing levels (Pandor 2008:3).

A former Minister of Education, Naledi Pandor, in her address at the UNICEF sponsored FP Conference on 30th August 2008, argued for FP education to be treated as a critical area of

growth in South Africa. The objective of the Conference was to promote literacy as an issue of national and international importance and to provide a platform for teachers to share experiences and best practices. Literacy was emphasised as one of the essential building blocks upon which future learning is dependent.

The National DoE planned to conduct Systemic Evaluations at Grade 3 and Grade 6 levels across South Africa. In 2004 the Grade 6s were evaluated nationally and the Grade 3s were nationally evaluated in 2007. These evaluations are intended to assess the extent to which the education system has managed to achieve social, economic and transformation goals by measuring the performance of learners, taking into consideration the context in which they experience learning and teaching programmes. The outcomes of these assessments are used to inform interventions (WCED Directorate: Quality Assurance: 2005:2-4). However, both the Provincial Grade 3 Systemic Mainstream Evaluations of 2002 and 2005 continue to reveal statistics that are very low; for example, in 2001 the average overall percentage score in literacy was 36% and in 2005 the literacy score was 43% for English and 49% for Afrikaans as reported (Pandor 2008:3).

To address the low literacy levels, the National Minister of Education reported that a curriculum that is explicit about the skills and competencies of learners had been implemented, since reading is a core skill for learning and performing effectively. The FFLC, which was launched in March 2008, is a national compulsory campaign in order to reinforce and consolidate the NCS in an endeavour to improve the literacy and numeracy skills of the FP learners. However, the Minister of Education was cognisant of the fact that many of the teachers found it difficult to translate the curriculum into good classroom practice (http://www.education.gov.za/dynamic/dynamic.aspx?=306&id=8012 2008/10/13).

Due to concerns about the poor results emerging from systemic evaluations of learners in Grade 3 and 6, the Western Cape Education Department (WCED) (WCED Literacy and Numeracy Strategy 2006–2016) at regional level has also offered support in order to improve the literacy levels and the pursuit of transformation of the poor Western Cape literacy results of 43%. There are further major concerns about the choice of language and learning and teaching (LoLT) brought about by the changing demographics and the need to be sensitive and supportive to the diverse cultures and languages in the classrooms. The use of mother tongue skills is to be upgraded to a level of mother tongue proficiency until at least Grade 6 (WCED Literacy and Numeracy Strategy 2006–2016 Executive Summary: sp).

DOWNLOAD PROJECT

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR