是DI干的吗?一项旨在提高偏远学校土著和托雷斯海峡岛民学生识字率的方案的影响

IF 0.9 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
J. Guenther, Sam Osborne
{"title":"是DI干的吗?一项旨在提高偏远学校土著和托雷斯海峡岛民学生识字率的方案的影响","authors":"J. Guenther, Sam Osborne","doi":"10.1017/jie.2019.28","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Over the 10 years of ‘Closing the Gap’, several interventions designed to improve outcomes for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students have been trialled. In 2014 the Australian Government announced the ‘Flexible Literacy for Remote Primary Schools Programme’ (FLFRPSP) which was designed primarily to improve the literacy outcomes of students in remote schools with mostly Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students. The programme, using Direct Instruction (DI) or Explicit Direct Instruction, was extended to 2019 with more than $30 million invested. By 2017, 34 remote schools were participating in the Northern Territory, Queensland and Western Australia. This paper analyses My School data for 25 ‘very remote’ FLFRPSP schools with more than 80% Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander students. It considers Year 3 and 5 NAPLAN reading results and attendance rates for participating and non-participating primary schools in the 3 years before the programme's implementation and compares them with results since. Findings show that, compared to very remote schools without FLFRPSP, the programme has not improved students' literacy abilities and results. Attendance rates for intervention schools have declined faster than for non-intervention schools. The paper questions the ethics of policy implementation and the role of evidence as a tool for accountability.","PeriodicalId":51860,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Indigenous Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/jie.2019.28","citationCount":"12","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Did DI do it? The impact of a programme designed to improve literacy for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students in remote schools\",\"authors\":\"J. Guenther, Sam Osborne\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/jie.2019.28\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Over the 10 years of ‘Closing the Gap’, several interventions designed to improve outcomes for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students have been trialled. In 2014 the Australian Government announced the ‘Flexible Literacy for Remote Primary Schools Programme’ (FLFRPSP) which was designed primarily to improve the literacy outcomes of students in remote schools with mostly Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students. The programme, using Direct Instruction (DI) or Explicit Direct Instruction, was extended to 2019 with more than $30 million invested. By 2017, 34 remote schools were participating in the Northern Territory, Queensland and Western Australia. This paper analyses My School data for 25 ‘very remote’ FLFRPSP schools with more than 80% Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander students. It considers Year 3 and 5 NAPLAN reading results and attendance rates for participating and non-participating primary schools in the 3 years before the programme's implementation and compares them with results since. Findings show that, compared to very remote schools without FLFRPSP, the programme has not improved students' literacy abilities and results. Attendance rates for intervention schools have declined faster than for non-intervention schools. The paper questions the ethics of policy implementation and the role of evidence as a tool for accountability.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51860,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australian Journal of Indigenous Education\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-01-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/jie.2019.28\",\"citationCount\":\"12\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australian Journal of Indigenous Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/jie.2019.28\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Journal of Indigenous Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/jie.2019.28","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12

摘要

在“缩小差距”的10年里,一些旨在改善土著和托雷斯海峡岛民学生结果的干预措施已经进行了试验。2014年,澳大利亚政府宣布了“偏远小学灵活扫盲方案”(FLFRPSP),其主要目的是提高偏远学校学生的扫盲成绩,这些学生主要是土著和托雷斯海峡岛民学生。该计划采用直接指导(DI)或明确直接指导(Explicit Direct Instruction),已延长至2019年,投资额超过3000万美元。截至2017年,北领地、昆士兰和西澳大利亚共有34所偏远学校参与其中。本文分析了25所“非常偏远”的FLFRPSP学校的数据,这些学校有超过80%的土著或托雷斯海峡岛民学生。它考虑了参与和非参与小学在计划实施前3年的3年级和5年级阅读成绩和出勤率,并将其与计划实施后的结果进行比较。研究结果表明,与没有FLFRPSP的非常偏远的学校相比,该计划并没有提高学生的读写能力和成绩。干预学校的出勤率比不干预学校下降得更快。本文对政策实施的伦理以及证据作为问责工具的作用提出了质疑。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Did DI do it? The impact of a programme designed to improve literacy for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students in remote schools
Abstract Over the 10 years of ‘Closing the Gap’, several interventions designed to improve outcomes for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students have been trialled. In 2014 the Australian Government announced the ‘Flexible Literacy for Remote Primary Schools Programme’ (FLFRPSP) which was designed primarily to improve the literacy outcomes of students in remote schools with mostly Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students. The programme, using Direct Instruction (DI) or Explicit Direct Instruction, was extended to 2019 with more than $30 million invested. By 2017, 34 remote schools were participating in the Northern Territory, Queensland and Western Australia. This paper analyses My School data for 25 ‘very remote’ FLFRPSP schools with more than 80% Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander students. It considers Year 3 and 5 NAPLAN reading results and attendance rates for participating and non-participating primary schools in the 3 years before the programme's implementation and compares them with results since. Findings show that, compared to very remote schools without FLFRPSP, the programme has not improved students' literacy abilities and results. Attendance rates for intervention schools have declined faster than for non-intervention schools. The paper questions the ethics of policy implementation and the role of evidence as a tool for accountability.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Australian Journal of Indigenous Education
Australian Journal of Indigenous Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
12.50%
发文量
13
期刊介绍: Published in association with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies Unit, The University of Queensland, the Australian Journal of Indigenous Education is an internationally refereed journal which publishes papers and reports on the theory, method, and practice of Indigenous education. The journal welcomes articles that ground theoretical reflections and discussions in qualitative and quantitative studies, as well as examples of best practice with a focus on Indigenous education. While AJIE has a particular focus on Indigenous education in Australia and Oceania, research which explores educational contexts and experiences around the globe are welcome. AJIE seeks to foster debate between researchers, government, and community groups on the shifting paradigms, problems, and practical outcomes of Indigenous education.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信