Salisbury North R-7 School: Four case studies
Travis Harry Naomi Vanessa

Our original project proposal argued that our new pedagogy would not count as successful unless the students educationally most at risk had shown reasonable progress. It is these students who, in standardised statewide tests, often show little or no progress from one test to the other. In 1999, as part of our monitoring of students educationally at risk, we identified four students, one each at Reception/Year 1, Year 2/3, Year 4/5 and Year 6/7 as the foci for case studies. These case studies would help us look more closely at how our project impacted on individual students. Because three of the four original students have since left the school, three more students 'educationally at risk' have been selected. The criteria for selection were:

• they were identified by school based educators as 'educationally at risk';

• they were present for both pre- and post-project assessments so that we could measure distance travelled.

(All student names are pseudonyms.)

Travis

Travis is in Year 1, and has been part of the project since its inception. In 1999 Travis was part of a withdrawal group of 8 Aboriginal and ESL students from the class who worked with me for four lessons a week, using scaffolding pedagogy. In 2000, the 3 Aboriginal students from his class were withdrawn for three lessons a week to work with the Aboriginal Education Teacher in another DWRAT classroom during scaffolded literacy time, so that scaffolding pedagogy could continue.

Travis's attendance was one of the best in the school. He was present 91% of school days and absent only 18 days for the year.

In 1999, as a Reception student, Travis was a cooperative, enthusiastic child in class, but his logic was not the logic of school, and his concentration span was short. There were many occasions when I did not know how to respond to his talk because I did not know what he was trying to say! However, in Year 1 he began to make more sense of school and school learning. Of course, DWRAT literacy lessons were only one small part of his school life, and there must have been many factors which helped to make a difference. Here are the results of his Marie Clay tests, the first in February 1999, the second in November 2000:

In 1999, Travis scored at the lowest Stanine level in all but the Concepts of Print test. Although he had spent five terms in Reception, he was the Aboriginal child in that year level most seriously at risk educationally. Two years later, he is scoring satisfactorily in all but his writing vocabulary. Most encouraging is the improvement in Travis's concepts of print which shows that he is paying close attention to print in texts and is able to notice errors in many cases.

It seems to be writing vocabulary which takes the longest to develop in most students. Although Travis has shown some development over the 18 months, it appears that he is only using phonics to sound out simple words. His visual memory still needs developing and he is still scoring on the lowest Stanine level. This may well be a matter of maturity. With Travis, we will wait and see. He is still very young.

Harry

Harry is the only original case study child to remain in the school. He is now in Year 2, aged eight years old. While Harry showed encouraging improvement in his 1999 scores, the progress has not continued this year, and he is a child seriously at risk. He does not often work independently in the classroom, and his behaviour does not support school learning, even in small groups with increased attention from an adult.

Harry's attendance is of great concern to us. Aboriginal Education Worker Muriel O'Loughlin has been vigilant in keeping an eye on Harry's attendance, telephoning home if he has not arrived, and on occasion picking him up from home. She even offered him a weekend's sleepover if he attended school for a full five days in a row! Harry was absent for 30% of possible school days in 2000, and late for another 30%. Because his class's literacy lesson had to be programmed in Lesson 2 each day, Harry often missed out. In fact, he has probably missed more than he has attended.

Harry's literacy development is not showing the promise it did the previous year. Here are the results of five Marie Clay tests, each assessment carried out three times, In February, 1999, August, 1999 and November 2000. The first was carried out before the project began. The second was after six months, and his progress in a very short period of time can be observed. However, this progress has not continued in all areas, as the final test shows.

Of particular concern is Harry's writing vocabulary. He had shown great improvement in 1999, when he was working with one adult in a small group of 8 students. However, this year, despite working regularly in a similar sized group, his writing has not progressed. Harry's classroom teacher supports the observation that Harry doesn't appear to be interested in writing during literacy lessons. He can sit at his desk for a lesson, and write no more than three words. We have not succeeded in retaining his newly found interest in literacy that was so evident in his Year 1 lessons. Following are the writing vocabulary samples of the past three tests. These lists of words are the result of 10 minutes of writing:

There has been other evidence to suggest that the positive change in Harry's participation in school has not been sustained over the project:

• Harry's attendance has been sporadic. It is very frustrating for teachers and difficult for Harry when he misses out so many literacy lessons through absence or lateness

• When Harry is at school, his attention in small groups is often focused on other students rather than the task at hand.

Our difficulties with Harry's learning remind us that we can never become complacent about the students in our care, and that scaffolded literacy does not solve every problem!

Naomi

Naomi is in Year 5. This is her first year in a DWRAT class, but I have been keeping a watchful eye on her for several years. Naomi was a focus of my Masters thesis in 1997.

Of possible days at school, Naomi was absent 23% of the time, and late for a further 9%. Naomi's focus in class is often social, talking to her friends, playing with their hair, concerning herself with other students' welfare. Despite this focus, her teacher's expectations are very high, and there has been obvious and significant growth in many areas of literacy over the past year. Here are her scores from December, 1998 and August 2000:

Naomi's progress has been really exciting. The difference between the Year 3 and Year 5 median nationally is 0.6 Profile Levels in Viewing, 0.9 Profile Levels in Reading, and O.5 Profile levels in Writing. Naomi's scores have improved 1.8, 1.3 and 1.2 Profile Levels respectively, according to her DART test scores, in 18 months. In other words, her rate of improvement in Viewing is three times the national rate, in Reading it is 1.5 times the national rate, and in Writing, it is almost two and a half times the national rate. Even more exciting, Naomi is able to read parts of Colin Thiele's Storm Boy after scaffolding (Profile Level 4.7), and parts of Paul Jennings The Paw Thing without assistance (Profile Level 4.0).

Naomi's writing skills have improved remarkably. It is valuable to look at the development of her writing over the past two years. Following are three pieces of writing which demonstrate the growth.

The first was the piece she chose as her best piece in November, 1998. Naomi was in Year 3 at the time. Naomi uses the cluster 'ur' often to complete words, a strategy which suggests that she is not using aural acuity to support the spelling of her words. Her use of words like 'hes' for 'his', 'hat' for 'had' are common for students who speak Aboriginal English as their first dialect. These spellings indicate that the strategy Naomi has been taught for spelling is to 'sound out' the words, rather than rely on her visual memory to retain the correct spelling.

Mrs Farnerys lifeonbfarm

hes Mum habur and Fumtur

and every ret thret they hat to got tr got the Bukel ont and go to the toele

theur and she did wot to the a bus pitur her mum had to mekel and a cow's

and the go tur wat a tur Lin peur and de for

The second piece is from August 2000. It was written under test conditions, and still shows considerable improvement. Naomi's spelling is much easier to understand, and she is able to use words like 'there' and 'friend' that cannot be 'sounded out'. Even her misspelled words, like 'sied' show that she is using her visual memory as well as aural acuity as a strategy; this spelling suggests that she knows that 'said' has an 'i' in it, even though the rest of the word has been sounded out. Naomi planned this piece, and has recorded her notes (which are in fact clearer than the final text) under the headings of O for Orientation, C for Complication, and R for Resolution.

On day I went to the shop and there was tis man and he name was big foot

and he was nise and frendlis and he was my friend and he sied that he

want to tak me to the Deset and I side Yes and he side oK on Sunday he

wok me up and we went to the Deset and we got there. Big foot got lost

and all the uther amnoile got him and Bog fo frgot that he go invible and I

saw Big foot and he yoos them and the Problem was sforb

The third piece (December 2000) was written after studying Storm Boy by Colin Thiele in Term 4. It is a scaffolded piece, and demonstrates how students are able to take resources from published authors, and use those resources in their own writing.

Tjerayh live between the beaches and the bush. His home was a long curved snake of dirt roads. All around were trees and bushes,tall and different shades of brown.

Tjerayh lived with Scott, his father. Their home was Wherevilla, a big house made of bricks and tiles. It had lots of little windows made of clean glass. Even though it was hot all year round, Tjerayh was happy there.

When Tjerayh went running along the poolside, or the beach, or the river - the fish weren't afraid. They knew he was a friend.

But one morning he saw everything in uproar and confusion. Two big men killed the fish. They had found the fish's home; it was so big like a classroom with lots of fish. They killed 20 of them and only 10 were still alive.

Tjerayh crept forward in fear and anger from behind a tussock he looked around sadly at the run and destruction. then Just as he was about to run back to tell Scott to grab his spear gun there was a faint swishing and crying and there in the water hiding behind fish Tjerayh carefully picked them up and put them into a plastic bag filled

with with water and gently ran back to Scott

And that was how miss Ally miss Nina and miss Kim live with Tjerayh

Naomi could not write such a rich and colourful piece by herself. Nevertheless, with scaffolding, she is able to participate far more fully in a literary world. We hope that this new knowledge becomes increasingly consolidated so that she is able to make choices from her new repertoire about the resources she uses in her writing.

Acknowledgement: Colin Thiele for the use of adaptations from Storm Boy.

Vanessa

Vanessa is in Year 6, an obliging and cheerful student with a great sense of humour. She speaks strong Aboriginal English. Most of the Aboriginal students in Years 6 and 7 are able to switch dialects readily when needed, but Vanessa has great difficulty using standard Australian English. The problem is partly vocabulary, partly pronunciation. When Vanessa came to our school in Year 3, she could not write independently at all, only copy, and her spelling was unrecognisable. I have seen her in Silent Reading lessons slowly turning the pages of a thick novel, unable to read even the chapter headings. Nevertheless, Vanessa is also extremely determined, and has received very useful support from her classroom teacher this year.

She was absent 20% of the school days, and rarely late; only 5 days for the entire year.

Vanessa's DART assessment results reflect her growing confidence in literacy:

The DART tests assess writing, reading and viewing skills under examination conditions, and Vanessa had trouble. She works very carefully and slowly, and in fact did not finish any of the tests in the time allowed. She missed the final five questions from the Reading test from a total of 22 questions. Each test lasts 1-2 hours, and because literacy requires so much work for Vanessa, she is disadvantaged by the requirements. She would have scored better if the test had been taken in shorter bursts. I have consulted with the DART authors about this, and they have suggested that this is what we do next year. Unfortunately, that is too late for this test. Vanessa's scores for this year have suffered as a result.

The improvement in scores over two years nationally is 0.6, 0.9 and 0.5 Profile levels respectively for Viewing, Reading and Writing. Vanessa's has improved 1.2, 0.7 and 0.4 Profile Levels respectively. While she has not managed to match the national rate of improvement in Reading and Writing, bear in mind that her tests were 18 months, not 2 years apart the way the timing of the tests disadvantaged her. Her improvement in Viewing scores is twice the national rate.

Again, these scores are not the only evidence of Vanessa's growing literacy skills. She is able to read parts of Colin Bowle's Surfing Mr Petrovic, (Profile Level 5) after scaffolding, and was also willing to struggle through other excerpts independently. She is able to read parts of Paul Jennings' Good Tip for Ghosts (Profile Level 4.0) with confidence. While her writing under test conditions was not her best, there is still a recognisable narrative structure in her writing. Her confidence in, and enjoyment of writing is very evident in her day to day work. Included here are three samples of Vanessa's writing. The first was written in December 1998 as part of the DART assessment. Vanessa was in Year 4. Her Aboriginal English dialect has very different pronunciations in many instances, and she had real trouble with spelling, for example 'adid' for 'had' and 'fand' for 'found'. At this time Vanessa's safest strategy for writing was to stick to words that she knew she could spell, and her stories were thus very repetitive. For example, in this story, she includes the words 'fun', home' and good' on many occasions. Vanessa uses full stops, but not speech marks at this time:

One day I was in the jong looking for birds it is good in the jong. I fand a big bird it's name is Griffin. Griffin got to say a word. My nest is lined with gold. I live high in the mountains. [These last two sentences copied from the instruction booklet.] I have a hom to Griffin and it is bog too and I live in my home. Will you be my frind. Yes seid Griffin I will be or find. So we went in my home. Then we went in Griffin home. It was fun on that day. We went to see my nanna and my mum it was fun too. Griffin did not have a nanna or a mum but he adid a tree and it is good in the tree and fun. (The End.)

There are so many pieces of writing of which Vanessa can be proud in 2000. I have not included her DART assessment writing, although these samples clearly show an understanding of narrative and argument structure, the use of paragraphs, a growing control of spelling, an understanding of how to persuade and her use of her sense of humour. Instead, I will offer two samples of her scaffolded work during the year to demonstrate her control of different genres.

Firstly, here is an excerpt from Vanessa's scientific report on an animal, written in July 2000:

Appearance

In Queensland and New South Wales the koalas are the smallest. Koalas have long, strong and sharp claws on their feet. Male Koalas weigh 6.5 kg and Females Koalas weigh 5.1 Kg Koalas have very short tails Koalas have a very fine, dense under coat and a longer shaggier top coat of fur.

This scientific piece demonstrates Vanessa's use of technical vocabulary, and her familiarity with the structure of scientific texts.

Vanessa read this final story to an audience of Aboriginal parents at our Christmas celebration in December 2000. It was written after studying Paul Jennings' Good Tip for Ghosts.

Nearby behind some old rusting beds I thought I heard a noise. I was too frightened to move. I wanted to go but my legs wouldn't work. I opened my mouth to scream help but no sound came out. I wqas so terrified I couldn't move.

It was a banging smashing noise like people fighting. It was coming my way. I was faking that I was a dead animal. I wished the lights were off so that I could go behind something. The banging got louder. I was coming closer.

Then I saw it. Or her. Or him. Or that thing. It was an old woman that looked like she was holdling an little box. She was dragging an old pair of shoes. She was looking under the beds. She was moving slowly. She was crying. She was all wrinkled and seemed to be holding an old hat. She walked towards me. With an angry face.

Then I saw it. She wasn't on the ground. She was about 40cm above the surface.

It was the ghost of my old nurse.

We have also been working with Vanessa on making explicit the differences between school and Aboriginal English, and there is also evidence of pronunciation changes in her formal reading and talking for an audience.

These four case studies show, in most areas, steady and sometimes very exciting improvements in student literacy skills. They also show that scaffolding is no miracle. It does not solve the issues of attendance and lateness, it does not prove to all boys that school matters, especially if attendance is so poor that they are not learning successfully. Nevertheless, the results are encouraging enough for us to still be convinced that this is the direction in which to move.