Search

This paper explores the enactment of government policy during the COVID pandemic in primary schools in England. Based on interviews with school leaders and teachers across the period 2020-21 (n = 66), drawn from two major studies of primary schools' priorities during the crisis, we argue that school leaders' responses can be understood as a distinct form of policy enactment particular to an unprecedented crisis. Policy arrived in schools differently, and was enacted differently. Our findings suggest that enacting policy during the COVID crisis was a process dominated by the need to act at speed, informed by the prioritisation of children's basic needs and based on a knowledge of the local circumstances. Thus dimensions of context which affect policy enactment were altered during the crisis, with the material circumstances of the school and the values of the headteacher becoming highly significant. The approach we term crisis policy enactment is response to policy which is focused first on coping but is also agentic, demonstrating a commitment to children's welfare and a belief in the power of schools to make a difference.

Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, the immediate and longer-term effects of school closures and ongoing interruptions on children's learning have been a source of considerable apprehension to many. In an attempt to anticipate and mitigate the effect of school closures, researchers and policymakers have turned to the learning loss literature, research that estimates the effect of summer holidays on academic achievement. However, school closures due to COVID-19 have taken place under very different conditions, making the utility of such a literature debatable. Instead, this study is based on a rapid evidence assessment of research on learning disruption -- extended and unplanned periods of school closure following unprecedented events, such as SARs or weather-related events. We argue that this literature provides clearer evidence on what helps children return to learning under similar conditions, and in this sense has more direct relevance for schools after COVID-19. A narrative synthesis of key recommendations is presented. Key findings are as follows: (i) that school leaders' local knowledge is pivotal in leading a return to school, (ii) the curriculum needs to be responsive to children's needs and (iii) that schools are essential in supporting the mental health of students. A discussion of the applicability and utility of these findings is provided in light of emerging evidence of challenges faced by schools in the context of an ongoing global pandemic and the disruption to education it continues to create.

Learning to write is a complex process and children have to orchestrate a range of processes and skills in order to produce written messages. Young children are facing increasing demands in terms of the expected complexity of their written messages in education settings across the world. Teachers, in turn, are challenged to support children and guide them towards independence in writing. This article explores the complexity of writing and, drawing on a study that describes the implementation of an observation as assessment framework for supporting writing, practical research-based strategies are provided to leverage observation as a form of assessment and how to support children to organise their own composition of messages.

Learning to read is an expectation rather than an exception in society today. Despite this, some children experience reading difficulties. The purpose of this article is to review recent and seminal research on reading difficulties through the lenses of three perspectives: cognitive, social and cultural and interactive. The three perspectives are reviewed and the contribution they make to our understandings of how to support children with reading difficulties are considered. The implication of these perspectives on instruction is explored by examining one contentious contemporary debate in the field of reading instruction; choice of texts to support reading development. To conclude, an argument for a more holistic approach to reading difficulties is provided with reference to two contemporary assessment tools.

The purpose of this research was to analyze the performance of pupils (N = 6,023) who took part in Reading Recovery (RR) in England on a decoding test, the Phonics Screening Check (PSC), administered at the end of Year 1 when children are approximately 5 to 6 years of age. The data cover two academic years (2015/2016 and 2016/2017) and include demographic information, pre- and post-intervention achievement test scores and PSC results. Descriptive statistics and linear regression modeling (using a linear spline specification for timing) were used. Results indicated that pupils who had an RR intervention before the PSC performed better than peers who had the intervention during or after the PSC. There was a positive and statistically significant increase in PSC performance among those whose RR intervention began earlier relative to the PSC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this paper is (1) to report on the design of the early writing observational writing rubric designed to observe and describe change over time in the writing of children emerging into conventional literacy (ages 6-7) within an instructional setting and (2) to investigate the initial reliability and validity of the rubric. We used an extant data set that included 52 videos of writing instruction in Reading Recovery lessons (approximately 520 minutes) and pre- and post-intervention test data, for 24 students, taken at multiple time points across a 20-week period. Dependent sample t-tests and HLM were used to ascertain if the rubric was sensitive to change over occasions. We also considered if the scores correlated with external literacy measures. The findings suggest that the rubric has good initial reliability and validity and is a useful tool for researchers to observe and measure change over time as young children write in an instructional setting; further validation work is required for use in other settings.

We used mixed methods to examine differences in the early writing development of children, identified as at risk of literacy difficulties, in the context of Reading Recovery (RR). From an extant dataset of 24 children, we identified those who made fast progress (n = 6) and those who did not (n = 8). We studied change over time in the sources of information they used and problem-solving actions they took over the course of the intervention. We developed a writing rubric to analyze videos of writing interactions (280 min) and written messages (N = 674). Results demonstrated that the fast-progress group had higher end of intervention ratings for multiple dimensions of writing. HLM analysis showed that the fast-progress group had higher rates of growth in their use of sources of information (spelling and letter-sound relationships) and observable problem-solving behaviors. Fast- and slow-progress groups did not differ in what they wrote but, for both groups, dips in legibility coincided with increased linguistic complexity. By juxtaposing descriptions of writing development for both groups, results provide useful information for instruction and intervention.

There is a critical need, according to national policy statements in the United States, to integrate information and communication technologies into instruction, and yet research about the effect of such integration on the literacy learning of at-risk populations is scant. In addition, barriers exist that prevent teachers from realizing the goal of information and communication technology integration. To address this issue, we conducted a mixed-methods study to investigate the effects of LetterWorks, an iPad app, on the letter learning of 6- to 7-year-old children in an early literacy intervention, Reading Recovery. We present empirical evidence about the effects of the integration of this iPad app into literacy instruction for struggling learners and we describe teachers' perceptions about the affordances and challenges of integrating this app into their instruction. Despite the positive effects of the iPad app on the letter learning of the children in the treatment group, teachers identified a misfit between their beliefs about literacy teaching and learning and the app as a barrier to their continued use. We suggest that the successful uptake of information and communication technologies into literacy instruction may depend, at least in part, on whether and how well training addresses the coherence between the information and communication technology itself and teachers' theories about teaching and learning.

In this study, we used Reading Recovery as the context to examine the relationship between three types of contingent teaching (temporal, instructional, and domain contingency) and student outcomes in a one-to-one literacy tutoring setting. We first created a National Teacher Effectiveness Index for all Reading Recovery teachers in the country and then used that index to identify two distinct groups of teachers from an existing data repository of 38 Reading Recovery teachers in training: those whose students had either lower average gain scores at the end of the school year (n = 6) or higher average gain scores (n = 4). We coded 1,199 teacher and student moves when they interacted at difficulty while reading a new book with teacher support. Results from hierarchical linear modeling analyses showed no significant differences for instructional contingency (the amount of information provided at difficulty), no main effects, and a nonsignificant interaction. Nor did we find statistically significant differences between the two groups of teachers for temporal contingency (the frequency of help). Dramatic differences existed, however, for domain contingency (what the teachers focused on when providing help). Specifically, teachers of students with higher outcomes had 8.3 greater odds of prompting students to use sources of information that they were neglecting while trying to decode a word. These findings provide needed information about the processes of scaffolding and have important implications not only for reading instruction and intervention but also for the ways in which scaffolding is studied.

Reading Recovery is one of the most researched literacy programs worldwide. Although there have been at least 4 quantitative reviews of its effectiveness, none have considered all rigorous group-comparison studies from all implementing nations from the late 1970s to 2015. Using a hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) v-known analysis, we examined if effects differed in the United States versus other nations, if experiments yielded larger effects than quasi-experiments, if the effects changed over time, and if the type of outcome mediated the impact estimates. We also considered the sustained effects of the intervention. After reviewing 203 primary studies, we identified 16 that met our criteria, such as treatment fidelity and experimental or high-quality quasi-experimental design. Based on a random effects model, the estimated overall effect was .59, with larger effects for outcomes based on the "Observation Survey" (Clay, 2013), and stronger effects in certain literacy domains, such as text reading, print knowledge, and general literacy. Although United States studies produced a larger point estimate (0.61) compared to other countries (0.52), and experiments (0.69) yielded a larger estimate than quasi-experiments (0.43), neither difference was statistically significant. Overall, effects did not change over time, but effects based on the Observation Survey did improve significantly from earlier to later studies. We also found that the long-term effect may diminish, but there were too few studies to estimate the sustained impact with confidence. The 0.59 overall effect places Reading Recovery in the top 10% in terms of impact of early literacy programs reviewed by the What Works Clearinghouse.

The purpose of this paper is (1) to report on the design of the early writing observational writing rubric designed to observe and describe change over time in the writing of children emerging into conventional literacy (ages 6–7) within an instructional setting and (2) to investigate the initial reliability and validity of the rubric. We used an extant data set that included 52 videos of writing instruction in Reading Recovery lessons (approximately 520 minutes) and pre- and post-intervention test data, for 24 students, taken at multiple time points across a 20-week period. Dependent sample t-tests and HLM were used to ascertain if the rubric was sensitive to change over occasions. We also considered if the scores correlated with external literacy measures. The findings suggest that the rubric has good initial reliability and validity and is a useful tool for researchers to observe and measure change over time as young children write in an instructional setting; further validation work is required for use in other settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]