| 
Scaffolding
at Wiltja Annexe of Woodville High School, Adelaide
The What Works? case study (2000)
Teachers' comments (2001)
The What Works? case study (2000)
The
following is an adaptation of the case study about Wiltja
which was published in What Works? Explorations in improving
outcomes for Indigenous students.
The
project is an accelerated reading and writing program for
primary and secondary Indigenous school students from remote
communities in South Australia. Coordinated by a team of researchers
from the University of Canberra, the project has been implemented
on two sites — the Wiltja Annexe of Woodville High School
in Adelaide, and the Amata Primary School located south of
Uluru. This case study is drawn from the Wiltja Annexe.
Wiltja
provides three programs for Indigenous young people from the
Anangu and Pitjantjatjara lands. The opportunity is provided
to access urban secondary schooling, and to complete South
Australian Certificate of Education (SACE) courses. Students
with potential for further academic development are nominated
by their teachers in these remote communities, and following
consultation with parents and family members, travel to Adelaide
to participate. Students live in a hostel at Northfield, and
participate in a tutorial program on most week-nights that
is designed to support their school-based program. Around
seventy students are enrolled in the Wiltja program at any
one time. The demand for places far exceeds those that are
available.
Brian
Gray and University of Canberra colleague Wendy Cowey have
been developing a 'scaffolding' approach to literacy for more
than a decade. The reason for this work has been the apparent
gap in literacy outcomes between Indigenous and non-Indigenous
students. The team's research indicates that many of the current
literacy practices in use with rural/remote Indigenous students
limit their chances of success. The team found, for example,
that the copying and memorising of text were common practices,
and that relatively few students were able to independently
read and write by the time they reached secondary school age.
Many adolescents were being instructed with literacy materials
designed for much younger students in the early years of schooling.
Building
on the work of Bruner and Vygotsky, the team has developed
an approach that makes the knowledge of literacy development
more explicit. The approach employs a sequence of strategies
that provide scaffolding support for students to read complex
texts fluently and accurately, and then to use the features
of literate language that they are learning to read in their
own writing.
A
group of five teachers has worked collaboratively with the
research team to implement the scaffolding approach at Wiltja.
As the following comment reveals, some members of the group
were highly receptive.
One
teacher commented:
 I have been teaching Anangu
students for about seven years, and have never felt particularly
successful in the various schools in which I have taught in
terms of literacy outcomes. After looking for some time for
an alternative, I was relieved to get involved in the scaffolding
approach. Other schemes that I tried, such as phonics, didn't
address the needs of fifteen year olds with reading ages of
six or seven year olds. Junior primary methodology just wasn't
working with these kids.
One
of the main changes to teachers' practice involves a significant
change to their questioning technique. Rather than asking
students questions that they may not be able to answer, teachers
construct their questioning in ways that clarify appropriate
responses before answers are sought. The objective is to create
a supportive learning environment that will foster greater
student participation.
Initially,
some teachers were sceptical of this technique, fearing that
they would be stifling student creativity and self-directed
learning:
A
major point of resistance for many experienced teachers, given
that it is so personally challenging, is the need to review
your whole questioning technique. This was certainly the case
for me, as I was concerned that by feeding answers to students
I would be inhibiting independent thinking skills. Actually,
this has tended to have the opposite effect, because the kids
feel so much more confident, and are asking more critical
questions.
Significant
increases in student achievement have been measured. For example,
all students have advanced by one or more levels in reading
and writing based on the national English Profiles.
At
the same time, teachers have noted a range of student learning
outcomes that are more difficult to measure, like an increased
level of student engagement in their learning. Video and anecdotal
evidence reflects much higher levels of student participation
- especially in terms of the quality of dialogue between students
and teachers as well as students themselves. Another reported
outcome was student enthusiasm to select their own texts,
something no teacher in the project had experienced previously.
Kids
are more prepared to have a go, in terms of volunteering
answers. There is no shame involved about making mistakes,
and students are more willing and able to help each other
along. Previously, these kids were really reluctant to participate.
For example, students would pull their jumpers over their
heads and suchlike. I have also noticed that words like
'Wiya!' (No!) and 'Lanma!' (Boring!), which were commonly
used by students last year are noticeably absent this year.
What
factors are critical to ensuring that the process that has
been initiated at Wiltja can be maintained and/or expanded
in future?
It was clear that input from the external research team was
crucial, both during the early planning and implementation
stages and for monitoring and refinement. Of equal importance
has been the development of a team approach among a core group
of teachers, together with the enthusiastic support of the
principal. As the Principal put it:
There
is the issue of critical mass. You need a group to become
strong enough to support each other and assist in the training
of new members… We are maintaining literacy as a core focus,
rather than taking on a range of issues. In other words, we
are trying to do as well as we can in literacy, and not be
distracted by other things. There is a real sense of determination
here… That means persistence, and hanging-in there when there
are frustrations and difficulties.
|
