Direct Instruction in very remote schools: a rejoinder to Guenther and Osborne (2020)

In an article published in this journal, Guenther and Osborne (2020) use data from the reading test of the National Assessment Program for Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN) to evaluate the effectiveness of the Flexible Literacy for Remote Primary Schools program in its first 3 years of implementation....

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The Australian journal of indigenous education 2020-12, Vol.49 (2), p.171-172
Main Author: Buckingham, Jennifer
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Aboriginal education
Aboriginal schools
Aboriginal students
Article Response
Direct instruction
Flexible Literacy for Remote Primary Schools Programme (FLFRPSP)
Geographic isolation
Literacy education
National Assessment Program, Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN) (Australia)
National competency tests
National programs
Native education
Part 2: A dialogue about the role of Direct Instruction (DI) in very remote schools
Pedagogy
Primary education
Program effectiveness
reading
Reading achievement
Rural schools
Teaching methods
Torres Strait Islander education
Torres Strait Islander students
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:In an article published in this journal, Guenther and Osborne (2020) use data from the reading test of the National Assessment Program for Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN) to evaluate the effectiveness of the Flexible Literacy for Remote Primary Schools program in its first 3 years of implementation. However, their analysis has some serious flaws, including that the ‘post-intervention’ data were actually collected from the start of the implementation period. This calls their conclusions that the program was ineffective into question.
ISSN:1326-0111
2049-7784
2049-7784
DOI:10.1017/jie.2020.18