Resources - Discussion Papers

Professional teaching standards for literacy

Mandy Paske, Department of Education, Tasmania

A paper presented at the 2001 AATE/ALEA Joint National Conference

ABSTRACT

This paper draws on the experiences of a Tasmanian teacher during the process of

• Defining a professional standard for the teaching of literacy which reflects a rich view and captures the complexities of literacy teaching expertise.
• Demonstrating competence and gaining recognition against that standard.

Although it is a personal reflection, the paper describes ‘issues’, ‘challenges’ and ‘opportunities’ which are relevant in broader contexts.

KEY WORDS

Literacy, Complexity, Professional, Competence.

Introduction

This is a personal and contextual reflection on a process and professional learning experience. It attempts to describe some of the issues, challenges and opportunities when defining professional literacy standards and then demonstrating competence against these standards. It is a process and learning experience that has been rewarding and challenging, empowering and demanding, affirming and taxing, exciting and confusing.

Context

The Tasmanian Department of Education is developing a number of competency-based qualifications to guide recognition of professional learning in a number of priority areas. A Steering Committee, established in 1998, nominated best practitioners in the teaching of literacy. From these nominations, a group of 16 was selected to provide a representative sample of sectors, systems and geographical representation. I was invited to be part of this group of ‘expert teachers of literacy’, which included teachers from adult education and varying sectors within government and non-government systems.

The group was brought together and facilitated through a functional analysis process to articulate what it is that competent teachers of literacy know and are able to do. Over two days, the group defined the key purpose of literacy teaching which was disaggregated into smaller and smaller components. The process of disaggregation continued until the units and elements of competence were reached. I wrote in my reflective journal at that time

‘Sitting down with a group of my colleagues and teasing out what the basis of literacy is, not starting with someone else’s beliefs, was a powerful learning experience for me. My background included consultancy work where I’ve facilitated others to think and reflect on literacy practices, but not in the depth this task demanded’.

These 5 core interrelated units formed the foundation of the standards:

• Planning for literacy learning
• Implementing appropriate literacy teaching strategies
• Monitoring, assessing and reporting literacy learning
• Working collaboratively with stakeholders and
• Implementing intervention strategies

A Working Party then polished the document and wrote the performance criteria, the range of variables and the evidence guide.

The task was complex, lengthy and broad in its consultation. The process of consultation included key stakeholders such as the University of Tasmania, Professional Associations, Catholic and Independent school representatives, Australian Council for Adult Literacy, Australian Education Union, Principal Associations and Tasmanian Education Department representatives. The units were accredited through the Australian Recognition Framework as the Graduate Certificate in Education; Teaching of Literacy. The Steering Committee provided feedback from constituents at each stage of development with input from the functional analysis group and circulation of the standards to a wider group of interested parties for comment and feedback.

These units of competence, or standards, reflect a broad, rich view of literacy, not a narrow interpretation of those aspects that can be more readily assessed or easily demonstrated. The units overlap, are repetitious and interrelated and confirm that what we do is not readily compartmentalized. They are an attempt to capture the complexities and sophistication of literacy teaching expertise; the ‘deeper structures of accomplishment’.

My initial involvement was in defining a professional standard for the teaching of literacy. To assist with the development of support materials and recognition processes, I was then asked to demonstrate my competence against that standard by identifying, collecting and presenting evidence to demonstrate competence against one unit. This also involved keeping a personal journal to reflect on the process; assessing the nature and complexity of the task. Realising quickly that evidence could be collected to demonstrate competence across a range of units, I decided to assemble and submit a portfolio related to all units.

I found some aspects of my practice difficult to demonstrate. I relied heavily on witness testimonies for Units of Competence 4; which relates to working collaboratively with stakeholders; including communication skills, strategies for involving stakeholders in decision-making processes and establishing and maintaining relationships. Generally, proving my competence was quite an affirming experience — however there was a definite ‘hole’ in my practice relating to moderating assessment. I recorded in my journal ‘It’s not until you actually come to finding evidence of doing something in your practice that you realize that there are gaps or omissions, or element/aspects that are there but not explicit enough’.

I provided 45 pieces or packages of evidence in my portfolio, which took 6 months to collate. These included a video, various artifacts relating to assessments, plans, teaching structures and strategies re viewing, listening and speaking, writing, spelling and reading. My portfolio also included reports, testimonials, evidence of my work with colleagues when in a curriculum officer role, certificates, testimonials etc. I recorded in my journal during this time ‘Finding the location and assembly of evidences very time consuming. Trying to concentrate on evidences that satisfy varied outcomes. Evidence needs to be rich and varied to reflect the diverse roles we have as literacy teachers. The use of audio and video tapes will be important as they may better capture the breadth of literacy teaching and learning practices in the classroom’

I submitted my portfolio to a panel for assessment, responded to questions and spoke to aspects of my practice in an interview situation. I was successful in gaining recognition of my competence against the standard and awarded the Graduate Certificate. My involvement is ongoing, as I will now be assessing other teachers who seek recognition against the units of competence.

The following issues, challenges and opportunities relate to both my initial involvement defining a professional standard and the subsequent process of gaining recognition against that standard. My reflections are framed as both statements and questions.

Issues

• The units provide a powerful image of what it is to be an exemplary literacy practitioner. However, demonstrating competence and attainment of a standard can be challenging. Evidence is the key; demanding rich artifacts that reflect the complex, integrated, contextual ‘seamless’ experience that is teaching.
  
• Competence should be demonstrated in a variety of contexts and circumstances with the ability to transfer knowledge and skill. This suggests a sustained element. How we illustrate depth and breadth of exemplary practice needs further discussion.
  
• The best learning is in collaboration. The process I was involved in was quite isolating because several other participants in the trial withdrew. The establishment of processes and structures to enable sharing and discussion of practices is a challenge for the future and should be an essential feature of any recognition system.
  
• The terms ‘standard’, ‘competence’, ‘outcomes’ are constructs. For me they were barren, technical terms with rigid connotations not readily associated with the world of children. During this process of defining and demonstrating my professional standard my interpretation of these terms has become richer. How do we ensure that our colleagues bring a rich understanding of the term standards, rather than the simplistic dictionary definition as a ‘degree’, a ‘level’ a ‘specification’?
  
• Standards are contextual. They change over time and place. Does the recognition that I have attained a certain standard in literacy teaching have a given duration? How long does competence last? Should there be reassessment requirements after a given period of time has elapsed? Is there a time limit on my competence - or a time limit on the standard?

• The process of articulating what it is that exemplary practitioners do, collating evidences to demonstrate attainment of the standard and the subsequent assessment of claims takes time and requires support, resources and expertise. How can we best ensure these processes are fair, valid, supportive and inclusive?
  
• Teaching and learning are such rich, all-embracing experiences that it is difficult to show in a precise way what it is we actually know and can do. How best do we reflect our practice?
  
• Our literacy standards expressed as units of competence are intended as recognition of advanced skills and a guide for professional learning in schools. They are not a mandatory ‘test’. How do we ensure they are used as intended?
  
• The units of competence are a rich standard. How do we establish and promote the credibility of these standards with our teaching community? Standards will be for teachers - its imperative they’re involved - don’t forget the realities of schools, of classrooms - the myriad of demands. How do we best facilitate our colleagues to be a learning community?
  
• Assessment of teachers against standards must be reliable, valid, rigorous, complex assessment practices. My evidences were rich. Were they valid? According to my assessment panel yes. But validity is a difficult concept to capture. They’re not a demonstration of competence against standardised tasks with detailed marking procedures.

• The functional analysis structure used to develop the literacy units provided a powerful learning opportunity. The task demanded deep personal reflection and clarification and collegial questioning and challenging to reach consensus. It was a draining but rewarding opportunity; initially defining literacy and then the attributes that reflect a high professional standard in the teaching of literacy.
  
• Through this accreditation process I have generally become a more reflective practitioner with a heightened level of consciousness and greater insight into my practice.
  
• These units of competence are a powerful framework to advocate a rich view of literacy. If they are accepted as an authoritarian model/standard the explicit teaching and learning of all aspects of literacy; reading, writing, listening, speaking and viewing will be promoted; not elements which are easily assessable.
  
• When developing units and assembling evidence to support my claims against the standard, I felt affirmed that some areas of my practice were exemplary. I was also challenged to find suitable evidence to support other elements. This highlighted aspects of my practice, which were not as explicit as the standard demanded. Attending to the areas indicated has resulted in modification and improvement of my teaching practice, which has improved outcomes for my students.
  
• The standards provide a valuable basis for professional learning and growth for school communities. They can assist in the design and provision of professional learning activities that make a difference to student learning outcomes. They are rich and diverse, incorporating a variety of strategies and programs and reflecting current theoretical frameworks and pedagogical guidelines. These units could be used as a reference point, providing guidelines and informing interactions with our students. For example "Am I recognising and valuing diversity?", "How do I encourage students to interpret and create texts from multiple perspectives?"
  
• We have begun using these units with our staff at Devonport Primary as the basis for long term professional learning to meet the targets articulated in our partnership agreement (focus for needs analysis, provide a common language, assist in development of IPLP’S)
  
• The recognition of professional abilities has been an empowering, enriching opportunity and one I would like other teachers to experience. The achievement and recognition of standards also empowers teaching as a profession; improving status and enhancing professionalism.

Conclusion

Literacy standards have to be valued, professionally credible, recognized, defined and judged by the profession. The methods for assessing competence against standards also needs to be rigorous BUT for me standards also need to be flexible enough to celebrate individuality; which is one of the hallmarks of being a professional.

Download a Word copy of this paper (52k)