How Well Prepared are Australian Preservice Teachers to Teach Early Reading Skills?

Meeks, Linda; Kemp, Coral

doi:10.14221/ajte.2017v42n11.1

Cited by 21 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, Purvis, McNeill, and Everatt (2016) and Washburn, Joshi, and Binks-Cantrell (2011) collected data in the initial year of a preparation program and prior to literacy-related courses, respectively. By contrast, Bos et al (2001) and Meeks and Kemp (2017) collected data toward the end of their participants’ programs of study. Researchers described preservice teachers as having “low levels” of specific knowledge related to reading processes (e.g., Purvis et al, 2016; Spear-Swerling & Brucker, 2003), as “fail[ing] to demonstrate explicit knowledge” (Washburn et al, 2011, p. 21), and as having “significant difficulty responding to higher order questions” (Modla, McGeehan, & Lewinski, 2014, p. 22).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In a more recent study, Aro and Björn (2016) found that “inservice teachers outperformed preservice teachers in actual knowledge of phonology and phonics, as well as morphology” (p. 122), although the differences between the two groups in knowledge of morphology were slight. In addition, Meeks and Kemp (2017) found that “more than 76% of preservice teachers were ranked as having skills [regarding phonological awareness and phonics] that were minimal to very poor” (p. 6).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Reviewing How Preservice Teachers Are Prepared to Teach Reading Processes: What the Literature Suggests and Overlooks

Hikida

Chamberlain²,

Tily

et al. 2019

Journal of Literacy Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Today’s world requires attention to all aspects of initial literacy teacher preparation, including how and what preservice teachers learn about the component processes of reading. To address this imperative, a review was conducted of articles published from 2000 to 2018 identified through the CITE-ITEL database ( https://cite.edb.utexas.edu ) that reported findings related to reading processes and initial teacher preparation. After an inductive analytic process, the authors organize findings into five focus areas: (a) definitions and delimitations of reading processes, (b) studies of preservice teachers’ beliefs about teaching reading processes, (c) research identifying preservice teachers’ knowledge gaps and misconceptions, (d) intervention studies aimed at increasing preservice teachers’ knowledge, and (e) studies detailing the application of knowledge about reading processes into contexts of pedagogical practice. The discussion considers the current gaps in how reading processes and literacy are conceptualized and possible areas of inquiry related to preservice teacher education and reading processes.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reviewing How Preservice Teachers Are Prepared to Teach Reading Processes: What the Literature Suggests and Overlooks

Hikida

Chamberlain²,

Tily

et al. 2019

Journal of Literacy Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We did not exclude studies from the review based on our assessment of quality, because our goal was to describe and understand the research base on teacher preparation (C. Carroll & Booth, 2015). 3 The exception, Meeks and Kemp (2017), reported very low response rates (5.2% and 4.14% in two cohorts), but that study was also one of the most ambitious in terms of recruitment, approaching 43 different teacher preparation programs. 4 These instruments included brief linguistic tasks, such as separating words into phonemes, syllables, and morphemes, and multiple-choice definition questions (e.g., what is a phoneme?…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Examining Teacher Preparation for Code‐Related Reading Instruction: An Integrated Literature Review

Tortorelli¹,

Lupo²,

Wheatley³

2021

Reading Research Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Advocates of the science of reading have argued that (a) teacher preparation programs do not provide adequate preparation to teach code-related reading skills; (b) as a result, teachers lack knowledge of this area of literacy development; and (c) without that knowledge, teachers are unable to effectively teach students to read. In this integrative literature review, we assessed the research evidence for the first claim. We identified 27 studies examining preservice general elementary preparation in code-related instruction, including phonological/phonemic awareness, phonics/decoding, spelling/orthography, and morphology, published between 2001 and 2020. We analyzed the studies to determine (a) how preservice knowledge of code-related instruction has been studied, (b) how preservice teachers' literacy knowledge was defined and assessed in these studies, and (c) primary findings across studies and implications for teacher preparation and future research. We found that the research base largely relied on quantitative multiple-choice assessments that privileged linguistic content knowledge over pedagogical and situated knowledge. The body of research was constrained by narrow definitions of science and knowledge, repetition across studies in methods and data sources, limited samples that overlooked diversity in preservice teachers and elementary contexts, and methodological problems. Thus, we caution against considering the issue of teacher preparation settled, and we offer recommendations for teacher preparation programs and directions for future research.

show abstract

“…That study did not directly assess the impact of personal literacy on instructional capacity, however. There has been some promising research on the topic in primary and early childhood education contexts (see Bromley, 2017;Cajkler & Hislam 2002;Carreker et al, 2010;Fenwick, 2014;Meeks & Kemp 2017); but secondary investigations are scant.…”

Section: History and Review Of Literature A Short History Of Cross-cumentioning

confidence: 99%

Can Secondary Teaching Graduates Support Literacy in the Classroom? Evidence from Undergraduate Assignments

Moon¹,

Harris²,

Hays³

2019

AJTE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Education policy in Australia and comparable countries requires that all secondary content teachers actively teach the literacy of their learning area and support the literacy development of students in their classes. In this paper we present evidence on the capacity of graduating teachers to meet that obligation. We review assessment data from 393 Initial Teacher Education students who completed a core unit in secondary curriculum literacy prior to graduation. We report that while the majority met the unit requirements, approximately 30% graduated as teachers with marginal or inadequate capacity to teach the literacy of their subject or support student learning through literacy. Approximately 12% of the sampled cohort failed the unit on their first attempt; yet 76% of those who failed went on to graduate. We show that such performance is consistent across the secondary disciplines included in the survey. We pose the questions as to whether secondary teachers with a marginal command of literacy strategies and poor literacy knowledge can be expected to provide effective literacy support, and whether education policy goals and provision of training in this area are therefore realistic. Recent Research and Policy Recent research in the field has been directed mainly toward extending and refining established policies and procedures in literacy support. This can be seen in work by May and

show abstract

How Well Prepared are Australian Preservice Teachers to Teach Early Reading Skills?

Cited by 21 publications

References 3 publications

Reviewing How Preservice Teachers Are Prepared to Teach Reading Processes: What the Literature Suggests and Overlooks

Reviewing How Preservice Teachers Are Prepared to Teach Reading Processes: What the Literature Suggests and Overlooks

Examining Teacher Preparation for Code‐Related Reading Instruction: An Integrated Literature Review

Can Secondary Teaching Graduates Support Literacy in the Classroom? Evidence from Undergraduate Assignments

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About