MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

How Has a Literacy Focus Changed Pedagogy across the Curriculum in Sydney Catholic Secondary Schools, 1995-2000?.

2001· article· en· W1237348 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
T. J. McMullen

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Psychiatric Association Journal · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation Systems and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumLiteracySyllabusPedagogySociologyMathematics educationReading (process)Professional developmentPsychologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Prior to about 1995, few secondary schools teachers outside the English KLA (Key Learning Areas) in Sydney's Catholic schools consciously focused on the development of literacy in their teaching approaches. By the mid-1990s however, a number of educational perspectives (e.g. genre approaches, teaching/learning cycles integrating content with literacy skills, different students' learning styles, explicit methods of teaching literacy) had converged to produce pedagogical approaches that were more concrete and more easily understood than had been the case with the Language Across the Curriculum policies of earlier decades. In particular this has involved teaching writing and reading through an understanding of text types. National Professional Development funding (1994-7) was instrumental in training a large number of school-based facilitators in pedagogical approaches utilizing a number of written text types. After this the Sydney Catholic Education Office developed a Secondary Writing Position Paper outlining the knowledge about text types already possessed by incoming Year 7 students as a result of the new English K-6 Syllabus, and explaining how secondary teachers could develop these further in their specific subjects. A Secondary Literacy Strategy for 1999-2001 was established to provide funding for school-based professional development and assistance in analyzing Year 7 ELLA (English Language and Literacy Assessment) test results and providing follow-up at cohort and individual level. The paper concludes with examples of changed pedagogy in Sydney Catholic secondary schools. (Author/RS) How Has a Literacy Focus Changed Pedagogy Across the Curriculum in Sydney Catholic Secondary Schools: 1995-2000? T. J. McMullen Sydney Catholic Education Office, NSW Paper presented at the AATE/ALEA Joint National Conference in Hobart, 12-15 July 2001 Abstract Prior to about 1995, few secondary teachers outside the English KLA in Sydney Catholic schools consciously focused on the development of literacy in their teaching approaches. By the mid '90s however, a number of educational perspectives (eg genre approaches, teaching/learning cycles integrating content with literacy skills, different students' learning styles, explicit methods of teaching literacy, etc.) had converged to produce pedagogical approaches that were more concrete and more easily understood than had been the case with the Language Across the Curriculum policies of earlier decades. In particular this has involved teaching writing and reading through an understanding of text types. National Professional Development funding (1994-7) was instrumental in training a large number of school-based facilitators in pedagogical approaches utilising a number of written text types. After this the Sydney Catholic Education Office developed a Secondary Writing Position Paper outlining the knowledge about text types already possessed by incoming Year 7 students as a result of the new English K-6 Syllabus, and explaining how secondary teachers could develop these further in their specific subjects. A Secondary Literacy Strategy for 1999-2001 was established to provide funding for school-based professional development and assistance in analysing Year 7 ELLA test results and providing follow-up at cohort and individual level.Prior to about 1995, few secondary teachers outside the English KLA in Sydney Catholic schools consciously focused on the development of literacy in their teaching approaches. By the mid '90s however, a number of educational perspectives (eg genre approaches, teaching/learning cycles integrating content with literacy skills, different students' learning styles, explicit methods of teaching literacy, etc.) had converged to produce pedagogical approaches that were more concrete and more easily understood than had been the case with the Language Across the Curriculum policies of earlier decades. In particular this has involved teaching writing and reading through an understanding of text types. National Professional Development funding (1994-7) was instrumental in training a large number of school-based facilitators in pedagogical approaches utilising a number of written text types. After this the Sydney Catholic Education Office developed a Secondary Writing Position Paper outlining the knowledge about text types already possessed by incoming Year 7 students as a result of the new English K-6 Syllabus, and explaining how secondary teachers could develop these further in their specific subjects. A Secondary Literacy Strategy for 1999-2001 was established to provide funding for school-based professional development and assistance in analysing Year 7 ELLA test results and providing follow-up at cohort and individual level. (see http://schoolsnet.syd.catholic.edu.au/Recsite/extrapages/literacy.htm.) This paper will conclude with examples of changed pedagogy in Sydney Catholic secondary schools. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Office of Educational Research and Improvement EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) *This document has been reproduced as received from the person or organization originating it. 0 Minor changes have been made to improve reproduction quality. Points of view or opinions stated in this document do not necessarily represent official OERI position or policy. BEST COPY AVAILABLE 2 PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE AND DISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.156
Threshold uncertainty score0.310

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.317 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Psychiatric Association JournalSame topicEducation Systems and PolicyFrench-language works237,207